BARACK TO TAG TURKS WITH GENOCIDE? Armenians Are Awaiting Pronouncement ...

Discussion:

(too old to reply)

Smegma

2009-03-20 17:27:43 UTC

"Campaign Vow to Call Armenians' Deaths 'Genocide' to Be Tested"

By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 20, 2009; A16

For years, President Obama has not minced words about labeling as
"genocide" the deaths of Armenians more than 90 years ago during the
demise of the Ottoman Empire. Nor have Secretary of State Hillary
Rodham Clinton and Vice President Biden.

All three regularly signed letters to President George W. Bush
demanding that he recognize "the mass slaughter of Armenians as
genocide" and saying that such an act "would constitute a proud,
irrefutable and groundbreaking chapter in U.S. diplomatic history."
During last year's presidential campaign, Obama repeatedly insisted
that, as president, he would "recognize the Armenian genocide."

"An official policy that calls on diplomats to distort the historical
facts is an untenable policy," Obama said in a statement dated Jan.
19, 2008.

Obama's pledge may have been smart politics: His campaign rival, Sen.
John McCain (R-Ariz.), infuriated Armenian Americans when he said it
was unfair to blame present-day Turkey for the deaths. But now that
Obama is president, his pledge has put him in a diplomatically
difficult position. The question of calling the deaths a genocide has
returned just as Obama is preparing for a visit next month to Turkey,
which firmly rejects such a label.

"There is no substitute for speaking plainly when you are talking
about mass murder," said Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), who
introduced this week a resolution calling on the president to publicly
recognize a genocide and whose district contains the largest
concentration of Armenian Americans in the country. "I hope he will
use the opportunity to prepare Turkey for U.S. recognition and to
encourage Turkey to have an open examination of its past."

The Armenia resolution is but one example of how a candidate's
narrowly tailored and effective foreign policy appeals can become
problematic once he is in office.

Clinton, for instance, has come under fire from some conservative
Jewish groups for criticizing Israeli plans to demolish homes in East
Jerusalem -- which Palestinians want to make the capital of a future
Palestinian state -- during her recent trip to Israel.

"She used to be very strong on a united Jerusalem, and now that's out
the window," said Morton A. Klein, president of the Zionist
Organization of America, citing a September 2007 position paper from
Clinton's campaign. "I am beginning to wonder if she just said what
she needed for the Jewish vote."

Administration officials argue that Obama has made huge strides in
fulfilling many of his campaign promises on foreign policy. They point
to his moving to close the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba; ordering the withdrawal of troops from Iraq; appointing a
special envoy for Israeli-Palestinian peace; and reaching out to
Syria, Russia and other countries on bad terms with the Bush
administration.

But officials also acknowledge that Obama's pledge on Armenian
genocide poses a tricky diplomatic balancing act.

"Our focus is on how, moving forward, the U.S. can help Armenia and
Turkey work together to come to terms with the past," said National
Security Council spokesman Mike Hammer. "It is important that
countries have an open and honest dialogue about the past. At the same
time, we want to work closely with both Turkey and Armenia on the key
issues that confront the region."

Few people deny that massacres killed hundreds of thousands of
Armenian men, women and children during and immediately after World
War I. But Turkish officials and some historians say that the deaths
resulted from forced relocations and widespread fighting when the 600-
year-old Ottoman Empire collapsed, not from a campaign of genocide --
and that hundreds of thousands of Turks also died in the same region
during that time.

U.S.-Turkish relations are on an upswing after a dismal period
immediately after the invasion of Iraq. Turkey, a NATO member, also
plays an increasingly important role in the Middle East, the Caucasus
and the Balkans.

Ahmet Davutoglu, the chief foreign policy adviser to Prime Minister
Recip Tayyip Erdogan, said he stressed that point in meetings this
week with senior administration officials. He also made the case that
Turkish-Armenian relations are improving in the wake of Erdogan's
recent visit to Armenia, and that any U.S. resolution on genocide
would only set back that progress.

"There is a process, and everyone should strengthen this process and
not try to weaken it," Davutoglu said in an interview. "We hope that
the discussions on the Armenian issue do not affect this process in a
negative sense."

Davutoglu sidestepped a question of what would happen if Obama raised
the Armenian issue before or during his trip to Turkey. "His visit
will be a historic visit in terms of U.S.-Turkish relations," he said.
"We think the success of this visit is essential."

But the administration's outreach to Turkey must be balanced against
the high hopes that Obama inspired among Armenian Americans. For
decades, they feel they have been disappointed by presidents on the
genocide debate. Only President Ronald Reagan, in 1981, referred to
"the genocide of the Armenians."

Among other things, the proposed House resolution calls on the
president to use his annual message to "accurately characterize the
systematic and deliberate annihilation of 1,500,000 Armenians as
genocide." Obama repeatedly has said he would embrace that language.

"This is the change he promised, and this is the change we expect,"
said Bryan Ardouny, executive director of the Armenian Assembly of
America.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/19/AR2009031902197.html

babeejm

2009-03-20 20:22:05 UTC

Permalink

Post by Smegma
"Campaign Vow to Call Armenians' Deaths 'Genocide' to Be Tested"
By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 20, 2009; A16
For years, President Obama has not minced words about labeling as
"genocide" the deaths of Armenians more than 90 years ago during the
demise of the Ottoman Empire. Nor have Secretary of State Hillary
Rodham Clinton and Vice President Biden.
All three regularly signed letters to President George W. Bush
demanding that he recognize "the mass slaughter of Armenians as
genocide" and saying that such an act "would constitute a proud,
irrefutable and groundbreaking chapter in U.S. diplomatic history."
During last year's presidential campaign, Obama repeatedly insisted
that, as president, he would "recognize the Armenian genocide."
"An official policy that calls on diplomats to distort the historical
facts is an untenable policy," Obama said in a statement dated Jan.
19, 2008.
Obama's pledge may have been smart politics: His campaign rival, Sen.
John McCain (R-Ariz.), infuriated Armenian Americans when he said it
was unfair to blame present-day Turkey for the deaths. But now that
Obama is president, his pledge has put him in a diplomatically
difficult position. The question of calling the deaths a genocide has
returned just as Obama is preparing for a visit next month to Turkey,
which firmly rejects such a label.
"There is no substitute for speaking plainly when you are talking
about mass murder," said Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), who
introduced this week a resolution calling on the president to publicly
recognize a genocide and whose district contains the largest
concentration of Armenian Americans in the country. "I hope he will
use the opportunity to prepare Turkey for U.S. recognition and to
encourage Turkey to have an open examination of its past."
The Armenia resolution is but one example of how a candidate's
narrowly tailored and effective foreign policy appeals can become
problematic once he is in office.
Clinton, for instance, has come under fire from some conservative
Jewish groups for criticizing Israeli plans to demolish homes in East
Jerusalem -- which Palestinians want to make the capital of a future
Palestinian state -- during her recent trip to Israel.
"She used to be very strong on a united Jerusalem, and now that's out
the window," said Morton A. Klein, president of the Zionist
Organization of America, citing a September 2007 position paper from
Clinton's campaign. "I am beginning to wonder if she just said what
she needed for the Jewish vote."
Administration officials argue that Obama has made huge strides in
fulfilling many of his campaign promises on foreign policy. They point
to his moving to close the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba; ordering the withdrawal of troops from Iraq; appointing a
special envoy for Israeli-Palestinian peace; and reaching out to
Syria, Russia and other countries on bad terms with the Bush
administration.
But officials also acknowledge that Obama's pledge on Armenian
genocide poses a tricky diplomatic balancing act.
"Our focus is on how, moving forward, the U.S. can help Armenia and
Turkey work together to come to terms with the past," said National
Security Council spokesman Mike Hammer. "It is important that
countries have an open and honest dialogue about the past. At the same
time, we want to work closely with both Turkey and Armenia on the key
issues that confront the region."
Few people deny that massacres killed hundreds of thousands of
Armenian men, women and children during and immediately after World
War I. But Turkish officials and some historians say that the deaths
resulted from forced relocations and widespread fighting when the 600-
year-old Ottoman Empire collapsed, not from a campaign of genocide --
and that hundreds of thousands of Turks also died in the same region
during that time.
U.S.-Turkish relations are on an upswing after a dismal period
immediately after the invasion of Iraq. Turkey, a NATO member, also
plays an increasingly important role in the Middle East, the Caucasus
and the Balkans.
Ahmet Davutoglu, the chief foreign policy adviser to Prime Minister
Recip Tayyip Erdogan, said he stressed that point in meetings this
week with senior administration officials. He also made the case that
Turkish-Armenian relations are improving in the wake of Erdogan's
recent visit to Armenia, and that any U.S. resolution on genocide
would only set back that progress.
"There is a process, and everyone should strengthen this process and
not try to weaken it," Davutoglu said in an interview. "We hope that
the discussions on the Armenian issue do not affect this process in a
negative sense."
Davutoglu sidestepped a question of what would happen if Obama raised
the Armenian issue before or during his trip to Turkey. "His visit
will be a historic visit in terms of U.S.-Turkish relations," he said.
"We think the success of this visit is essential."
But the administration's outreach to Turkey must be balanced against
the high hopes that Obama inspired among Armenian Americans. For
decades, they feel they have been disappointed by presidents on the
genocide debate. Only President Ronald Reagan, in 1981, referred to
"the genocide of the Armenians."
Among other things, the proposed House resolution calls on the
president to use his annual message to "accurately characterize the
systematic and deliberate annihilation of 1,500,000 Armenians as
genocide." Obama repeatedly has said he would embrace that language.
"This is the change he promised, and this is the change we expect,"
said Bryan Ardouny, executive director of the Armenian Assembly of
America.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/19/AR200...
Oh is that why President O is going to Turkey next month on his tour of Europe..

to criticize and harass the Turks..What does he do to our enemies
then?!!

Mitsos**

2009-03-26 21:14:45 UTC

Permalink

Post by babeejm

to criticize and harass the Turks..What does he do to our enemies
then?!!

What enemies? The Kurds, the Greeks, the Bulgarians, the Armenians, the
Assyrians, the remaining Christians, the Iranians, the Iraqis, the
Syrians or what enemies??

rich murphy

2009-04-03 23:52:09 UTC

Permalink

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=171406

Javier Solana: History should be analyzed by historians

04 April 2009, Saturday
SELÇUK GÜLTAŞLI BRUSSELS

'I really believe that history is history. I don't think we need to
put the past every day on the table. History needs to be analyzed by
historians,' said Solana on Armenian 'genocide' claims in an interview
with Today's Zaman.

One of the most senior politicians in Europe, Javier Solana, said
history is history and should be analyzed by historians when asked if
some European national parliaments' resolutions on the Armenian
"genocide" had helped the reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia.

Secretary-General of the Council of the European Union and High
Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy Javier
Solana gave one of his rare interviews to Today's Zaman hours before
the crucial NATO summit kicked off and days before new US President
Barack Obama's historic visit to Turkey. A former Spanish foreign
minister and former NATO secretary-general, Solana has been one of the
pivotal leaders of the EU known for his strong support for Turkey's EU
bid.

A political figure who knows Turkey and her politics very well,
Solana, commenting on the recent rapid rapprochement between Turkey
and Armenia, said it was very good news. Asked whether he thought some
European national parliaments' resolutions and laws on the Armenian
"genocide" had contributed to reconciliation between the two embattled
neighbors, Solana said history was history and should be left to
historians to be analyzed. "I don't think we need to put the past
every day on the table," he said, hailing President Abdullah Gül's
visit to Yerevan last September.

Solana, who as a youngster fought against the military dictatorship of
Francisco Franco in his native Spain, said events related to the
Ergenekon investigation were very serious and should be dealt with
very seriously. Stressing that any activity that has the aim of
toppling an elected government should be punished, Solana underlined
that the EU would support the investigation "without any doubt" as
long as legal guidelines were fully respected.

Attaching great importance to Obama's upcoming visit to Turkey, the
veteran leader said the visit had the purpose of conveying a very
strong message that Turkey is and should be an important player in the
international community. According to Solana, the new US president is
very keen on reconstructing good relations with Turkey.

As a former secretary-general of NATO speaking hours before the
historic summit in Kehl and Strasbourg, Solana refrained from
commenting on who should be the next secretary-general; however, he
stressed that he did not think the decision would be made during the
summit. Regarding Turkey's reservations about Danish Prime Minister
Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Solana said he had no doubt that Rasmussen had
the required capabilities but underlined that he should be approved by
each and every member country. "And Turkey is an important member in
the alliance," he said.

The following are excerpts from the interview:

'AK Party got a very good score'

Turkey has recently concluded local elections in which the Justice and
Development Party (AK Party) lost slightly. Looking from Europe, how
do you read the election results in terms of European reforms?

If I recall correctly, the AK Party received 39 to 40 percent of the
total ballots. That is not a bad result. It is a little lower than
before, but it is a very good score. And, from our point of view,
there is nothing to say.

Do you think that the government has received a vote of confidence?

I think it's a pretty good score. For us, it does not matter if they
received 39 or 47 percent. What is important for us is that the
government should continue the reform process. In any case, the
government is doing a good job, and we support the process of reforms.
I hope very much the reforms will get Turkey closer to the EU.

Actually, the expectation in Europe was a swift return to reforms
after the local elections.

As you know, the process of reforms is something we welcome. That will
be, in our mind, not only good for your country, the development of
the economy, but it will also bring you closer to the EU. For those
people, like me, who want to see Turkey getting closer to the EU, the
continuation of reforms is good news. When Prime Minister [Recep
Tayyip] Erdoğan said that he will continue with the reforms, it was
something we welcomed, and I hope this will be the case.

'Ergenekon should be punished if proven guilty'

The European Parliament, in its last two reports, called on Ankara to
investigate a network called Ergenekon. You have been, maybe, the most
consistent European leader asking Turkey to establish civilian-
military rules according to European standards. How significant is
this investigation when seen from Brussels?

Well, first, I think those events were very serious, and they have to
be taken as they are, I mean, very seriously. Of course, the process
of trial and investigation should be done correctly. Those sorts of
activities that go against the established democracy have to be
investigated, and if proven, they need to be punished. We will support
it if it is done in the correct manner. No doubt about that!

The Spanish experience is a bit similar to Turkey's history with
military interventions. This is the first time in Turkish history that
four-star generals have been indicted for coup attempts. Do you think
the investigation is an opportunity to raise Turkish civilian-military
relations to European standards?

It is an opportunity to make clear the truth of events. As I said,
they were very serious events. To revolt against a constitutional
government is something that has to be punished. I hope very much that
truth comes out of the investigation by the appropriate handling of
this case.

I remember very well that we quite frequently spoke with you about
Cyprus in 2004 and 2005. You were very keen on finding a solution at
the time. Unfortunately, it did not come about. The EU decided back in
2006 to look into the developments in 2009. Is 2009 a deadline on
Cyprus?

It is a moment to look at how the situation has evolved. I would like
to say that a new process has been put in place in 2008 led by the UN.
In the last several days, the two sides have started to talk about
issues related to the EU, which is, I think, very good news. You know
how much I will like to see this historical crisis resolved. I did my
best in all the positions I had in international and European politics
to contribute to the solution.

Some members want to see 2009 as a deadline. Is this interpretation
correct?

I think it is an important date in which, without any doubt, an
analysis has to be made about how much the process has moved. I hope
we arrive to that date with the problem solved.

If the talks between Turkish Cypriot leader Mehmet Ali Talat and Greek
Cypriot leader Dimitris Christofias do not go well, will you freeze
another five or six chapters?

I think this is not the right approach. The right approach would be to
get everybody together and work hard to make 2009 the year of
solution. Then, all the questions you're putting to me now will be
irrelevant.

Don't you sometimes think that it would have been much better to admit
a unified island rather than a divided one?

I don't think we will benefit a lot if we keep looking into the past.
The situation right now is as it is. To speculate on how it could have
been done does not lead anywhere but to certain melancholy. It is not
a good exercise to look back and see what could have been done. The
right approach would be to handle the present and future properly. The
past, unfortunately, cannot be removed.

'Obama wants to construct good relations with Turkey'

US President Obama will be visiting Turkey in a few days' time. Turkey
will be the first Muslim country he will visit. What does this tell
you?

I think Mr. Obama is a very wise man. In such a short time since
taking office, he has proven to have a very intelligent sense about
what the important issues and priorities are. He will be in İstanbul
and Ankara. He will be meeting with the leaders and people. I think he
wants to give a very clear message that a country like Turkey, a
democracy with a predominantly Muslim population, is and should be an
important player in the international community. President Obama is a
very clever man who wants to construct and reconstruct good relations
with your country.

President Gül paid an important visit to Armenia, which European
Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso dubbed "historic." Now high-
level political contact is taking place. Do you expect a breakthrough?

I would very much like to see it happen. I had the opportunity to
speak with President Gül both before and after his visit to Yerevan. I
have a very good personal relationship with your president. I respect
him very much, and I think he is a very intelligent man. I have the
impression from these talks that Turkey has the will to move forward.
I also have the feeling that taking the next step would not be that
difficult.

Could the next step be opening the border?

I think that should be a step. But which step, I do not know. It could
be the next or the one following the next.

You know very well that relations between the two countries are
already very complicated. Do you think the resolutions passed by some
national parliaments of EU member countries have helped the
reconciliation?

I really believe that history is history. I don't think we need to put
the past every day on the table. History needs to be analyzed by
historians. The relations between countries, Armenia and Turkey in
this case, need to be reconsidered and restarted.

There was a spat between Turkish Prime Minister Erdoğan and Israeli
President Shimon Peres in Davos. Some said Turkey lost all its
leverage in the region after this incident. Do you think that Turkey
can still play a pivotal role in the Middle East?

I have no doubt about that. Turkey is already playing a role in the
region, it has played [a role] in the past and it will continue to do
so in the future. No doubt about that!

'I have some concerns about the new Israeli government'

Do you have any concerns about the new Israeli government?

Yes, I have some concerns. I have devoted much of my energy to try to
construct a two-state solution. This is our dream and objective, like
Turkey as well as the international community. I think dealing with an
Israeli government that does not recognize the two-state formula will
be more difficult. I hope very much that this government, despite some
of the statements that have been already made, will continue to work
for a two-state solution and do this very rapidly. This should not be
done in 100 years' time. That has to be done now.

In the wake of the Erdoğan and Peres spat, there have been some
articles stating that the AK Party government is taking Turkey not to
the EU but to the East, to the Islamic world. Do you have such a
perception?

I do not. The government is continuing the reform process and taking
your country closer to the EU.

Yosemite Sam

2009-04-06 11:08:32 UTC

Permalink

Turkish government attempts to deny the Armenian Genocide reminds one
of death-row inmates professing their innocence and when it is no
longer possible, try to find ways to blame their victims for their
crimes. Murderers have a special way of referring to their victims,
“got dead” as if they had nothing to do with their death. Primitive
but very often used expression of denial.
One would expect better from the so-called democratic government of
Turkey. They should not behave like common murderers who do not have
the intelligence to understand the evidence of their dastardly deeds.
No one is saying that present day Turkish government is responsible
for the Armenian Genocide but by trying to deny it, they make
themselves after the fact parties to the Armenian Genocide. It is hard
to understand why the Turkish government would spend so much money and
show Turkey unfit for EU membership by acting as if they had no sense
of honor and justice.
Turkey should stay out of US Congress and the Armenian Genocide
resolution because nothing would show Turkey more ready for EU
membership than the ability squarely to face that dark and shameful
period of Turkish history.

lapMAHheinie

2009-04-06 17:45:15 UTC

Permalink

YES, TURKS, IT WAS GENOCIDE!

------------------
"A Deadly Time Brought to Life"

Book Review
By Chris Bohjalian
Sunday, April 5, 2009; B01

ARMENIAN GOLGOTHA
By Grigoris Balakian
Translated by Peter Balakian with Aris Sevag
Knopf. 509 pp. $35

Last month, while I was visiting my father in Florida, we had dinner
one night with my aunt. We were discussing the way Jim Jones had
poisoned 900 of his followers with cyanide-laced Flavor Aid in 1978,
and suddenly my aunt was explaining that another way to poison someone
is with a yogurt smoothie. "That's how the Turks poisoned your
grandmother's classmates in Constantinople in 1915," she said. "They
poisoned the tahn."

This story was new to me, and I am 47. But as a second-generation
Armenian American, I've found that it's not uncommon for one of these
UFO horror stories to materialize out of nowhere over coffee. My
childhood was a combination of suburban cliché and Middle Eastern
exoticism. Although most of my boyhood in New York's Westchester
County revolved around Little League baseball, "Star Trek" and
coveting my older brother's record collection, there was also the
powerfully alien aura cast by my grandparents, Leo and Haigoohi
(pronounced Hi-Gui) Bohjalian. They emigrated to the United States
from Paris in 1927, though both had been born near Constantinople just
after the turn of the last century. I saw them weekly, either at our
home (a development Colonial) or theirs (a three-story brick house
that in my memory is a mansion, but that I imagine would strike me as
rather modest if I were to revisit it now).

My grandparents spoke a strange language, the characters that formed
the words in their books were impenetrable, and my grandfather used to
wear a suit with a vest, even on Saturday afternoons. He would play
his beloved oud for hours. Their sheer foreignness drove my father
crazy, and he worked hard to be more American than a Ford motor plant.
In hindsight, I shouldn't be surprised that he entered one of the more
iconic American professions of the middle part of the 20th century:
advertising.

But there was also something tragic about Leo and Haigoohi. Though no
one ever told me the precise circumstances, I knew that three of their
four parents had died in the genocide of 1915, and Leo -- who had left
Turkey -- went back after World War I to find Haigoohi. Sometimes I
was told that she had been hidden by a Muslim family, other times that
she had found shelter in a convent.

Still, my father never spoke of what may have happened to his
ancestors in 1915, and as a boy I never asked. And so their story
emerges in unexpected, fitful thunderstorms -- such as my aunt's
yogurt smoothie story last month.

Now, in a powerful memoir being published for the first time in
English, I may finally be getting an inkling of what Leo and
Haigoohi's parents endured in the Armenian nightmare of 1915-16.
Originally published in 1922, "Armenian Golgotha" is Father Grigoris
Balakian's account of his deportation from Constantinople with 250
other Armenian intellectual and political leaders on April 24, 1915 --
now Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day -- and the cruelties he endured
over the next three years as he struggled to survive. Roughly 1.2
million Armenians would either be slaughtered by Turkish killing
squads or would die of exposure or starve to death in camps in the
deserts at the southeastern edges of the Ottoman Empire. Balakian was
a great-uncle of the poet and memoirist Peter Balakian, who translated
this account with Aris Sevag.

The book presents a litany of barbaric savageries: the mobile killing
squads (chetes) of pardoned Turkish criminals; the endless caravans of
starving women and children; the grisly decapitations and
dismemberments of unarmed Armenians by frenzied mobs using "axes,
hatchets, shovels, and pitchforks." Balakian shares it all in a tone
that vacillates between reportorial numbness and a grim determination
to live to tell the world what he has witnessed: "On our second
day . . . we saw, in the fields on both sides of the road, the first
decomposed human skeletons and even more skulls, long hair still
attached to them, leaving no doubt that they belonged to females.
Among our companions were young Armenian intellectuals . . . . They
often bent down to pick up the skulls and kiss them."

When Balakian asks the Turkish captain guarding them why the victims
hadn't been buried, he's informed that they had been tossed into a
mass grave, but the winter floods had washed away the dirt. Then the
captain adds offhandedly that these were the bones of some of the
86,000 Armenians who had been "put on this road so that we could
cleanse them." (The word "cleanse" as a euphemism for genocide appears
often in the text, as does the word "jihad," giving the account an
eerie and disturbing contemporaneousness.)

Balakian eventually escapes from the caravan, using his fluency in
German to pass in a variety of guises, including that of a German
engineer.

In addition to being a poignant, often harrowing story about the
resiliency of the human spirit, "Armenian Golgotha" is also a window
on a moment in history that most Americans only dimly understand.
Despite the enormous amount of new scholarship into the genocide
(including work by Turkish scholars), some Americans view the killings
as less calculated than the Holocaust and wonder whether the event
should even be categorized as "genocide" -- especially at the risk of
antagonizing Turkey, a NATO ally. (Exhibit A? The current debate over
a possible U.S. House resolution that actually places the words
"Armenian" and "genocide" side by side.) In some people's eyes,
particularly those who wish to deny what really happened, the Armenian
ordeal was a series of chaotic, decentralized, non-bureaucratic
massacres -- the opposite of the systematic, state-centralized,
bureaucratic slaughter of 6 million in the Holocaust. Balakian's
account, however, is rich with evidence of the Turkish government's
complicity and its leaders' premeditation. Deportation, in their
vernacular, was always a subterfuge for extermination.

So I hope that "Armenian Golgotha" will be widely read, both as a
riveting tale of one man's survival and as a historical document.

[Chris Bohjalian is the author of 11 novels, including "Midwives" and
"The Double Bind."]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/03/AR2009040301894.html