As you've probably seen, Rep. Ilhan Omar voted "present" on a House resolution recognizing the Armenian Genocide. She contended that the resolution, which passed 405-11 (not including the "present" votes of Omar and two of her colleagues), was a "cudgel in a political fight" and that recognition and accountability for human rights atrocities "should be done based on academic consensus outside the push and pull of geopolitics." She also suggested that the U.S. had no standing to speak out on the Armenian Genocide without recognizing the horrors of the transatlantic slave trade and Native American genocide.
This explanation did not seem to satisfy many people. That includes me -- I think this was a terrible vote paired with a terrible apologia for the vote, and she deserves to be raked over the coals for it.
But since, apparently, a bit of genocide wishy-washiness is less hot and emotionally fraught than a debate over "Benjamins" (seriously: this is The Bad Place), I wonder if we might take this opportunity to reflect -- with cooler heads -- on some patterns that I think are repeating themselves
On the one hand: A great many people otherwise fond of or sympathetic to Ilhan Omar have been very sharply critical of her vote. She does have some defenders, but at the outset they seem to be relatively few and far between. On the other: many of Omar's critics are not people "otherwise fond of or sympathetic to" Ilhan Omar, and are less disappointed than they are elated to have a valid excuse to launch another pile-on.
People in the first category have certainly observed the fact of the second category and are uncomfortable contributing to the "pile-on", which they see as reflecting particular anti-Black and Islamophobic biases. After all, why is there such intense focus on Omar's "present" vote, as compared to the eleven Representatives who actually voted "no" (all Republicans) or even the other two "present" votes (Republican Rep. Paul Gosar and Democratic Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson)? For example, Rep. Johnson, who apparently has gone on the record saying she denies the Armenian Genocide outright, would seemingly deserve an even greater degree of scorn. And of course, those who outright voted against the resolution should face even more intense condemnation.
There is, to be sure, an answer to the "why Omar" question that doesn't boil down to "because of her identity". She has a much higher profile than does Eddie Bernice Johnson or Paul Gosar, she styles herself as a human rights advocate, there are many people who are disappointed in her that probably have no particular interest or hope in what Virginia Foxx does. Nonetheless, it is hard to say with a straight face that Omar's identity is playing no role in the dynamic. And the effect remains that the Black Muslim women makes a mistake and gets obliterated for it even as other, predominantly White colleagues effectively get a free pass for the same or worse conduct.
And here's the real kicker: the genuine, non-prejudicial, fairly-motivated critics of Omar who are speaking out based on sincerely held and non-opportunistic commitments to human rights? I don't think there is anything they could have reasonably done (save not speaking out at all) to prevent their condemnation from contributing to the pile-on effect. Even if that's not what they want, even if it makes them queasy. The dynamics in play here go beyond them; in the current moment there is not a way to in any robust sense speak critically about Omar (including justifiably critically) without carrying the risk that it will be harnessed by more primordial political actors eager to hoist up the pinata again. It would be wrong to say that this outcome was desired by the genuine critics; it would I suspect be equally wrong to say it could have been avoided by those critics.
Do you get it? Do you see the pattern? In l'affaire Benjamins, it was often claimed that Omar's critics were wholly and entirely right-wing smear merchants, and that it was their fault -- or more than that, their desire -- that she be subjected to a completely over-the-top orgy of histrionic condemnations that seem far disproportionate to her offense. This allegation, in turn, infuriated those of her critics who were genuinely motivated by non-opportunistic liberal instincts and concerns about antisemitism, and who wanted to both send a clear message that "this is not okay" but had no desire to endorse a witch-hunt. Yet Omar's defenders, in effect, viewed that entire posture as disingenuous -- crocodile tears by political arsonists. Omar's critics are her critics -- some just put on a better figleaf of respectability than others.
One might hope that this go-around might offer some critical distance illuminating the pattern. Some of Omar's defenders in the last controversy are among her critics this time; perhaps they can learn to empathize with their peers in recognizing the genuinely uncomfortable position they find themselves in, and the difficulty (if not impossibility) of insulating their valid criticisms from enlistment into more unsavory political projects. And I'd also hope that some of Omar's critics, for those whom this issue has a less immediate pull on their psyche, can see how she really is being singled out in a way that seems anomalous given her degree of offense compared to other wrongdoers (a recognition which by necessity acknowledges there is a degree of offense!). In the history of debates over recognizing the Armenian genocide, after all, she is by no means the only actor to have gotten it wrong.
Showing posts with label Armenia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Armenia. Show all posts
Thursday, October 31, 2019
Wednesday, October 25, 2017
Things People Blame the Jews For, Volume XXXVII: The Armenian Genocide
There's an antisemitism scandal at Rutgers University, and this one doesn't involve Jasbir Puar (she does have a new book coming out though, criticizing Israel for not killing more Palestinians. You think I'm joking).
No, this one centers around microbiology professor Michael Chikindas, whose social media feed contains a veritable smorgasbord of antisemitism, from calling Judaism the "most racist religion in the world", to putting up images claiming Jews control everything from the Federal Reserve to the sex trafficking industry, to posting a cartoon where a Jew literally steals money from poor children to give it to Israel. Oh, he also wants everyone to know that Israel has a lot of gay people (I guess "pinkwashing" doesn't work on everyone).
But let's cut through the old and hone in on the new.
Fortunately, Chikindas claims he has Jewish descent and even used to be married to a Jew (hey, just like Alice Walker!). So any concerns about antisemitism are obviously spurious.
But just to remove all doubt, Chikindas says he is absolutely open to having a "civilized" conversation about his claims, e.g., "These jewish motherfuckers do not control me. They can go and fuck each other in their fat asses."
No, this one centers around microbiology professor Michael Chikindas, whose social media feed contains a veritable smorgasbord of antisemitism, from calling Judaism the "most racist religion in the world", to putting up images claiming Jews control everything from the Federal Reserve to the sex trafficking industry, to posting a cartoon where a Jew literally steals money from poor children to give it to Israel. Oh, he also wants everyone to know that Israel has a lot of gay people (I guess "pinkwashing" doesn't work on everyone).
But let's cut through the old and hone in on the new.
In one post, Chikindas claimed, “Israel is the terrorist country aimed at genocidal extermination of the land’s native population, Palestinians,” and added: “we must not forget that the Armenian Genocide was orchestrated by the Turkish Jews who pretended to be the Turks.”
Fortunately, Chikindas claims he has Jewish descent and even used to be married to a Jew (hey, just like Alice Walker!). So any concerns about antisemitism are obviously spurious.
But just to remove all doubt, Chikindas says he is absolutely open to having a "civilized" conversation about his claims, e.g., "These jewish motherfuckers do not control me. They can go and fuck each other in their fat asses."
Tuesday, May 17, 2016
Early Summer Roundup
May is a quiet month for me. June and July and August? Less quiet. So I'm trying to get work done now before all the travel and teaching and testing comes up down the road.
In the meantime, here are some things to clear off my browser.
* * *
A fun interview with Justice Clarence Thomas, dishing on his interests, his relationship with Justice Scalia, and his confirmation process.
The ADL will recognize the Ottoman Empire's genocide of Armenians at the turn of the 20th century. While recognizing that Turkey has an alarming inability to tell Jews apart when we advocate on this issue, I've long argued that this was a question of moral principle upon which the Jewish community cannot compromise.
An investigation into anti-Semitism at the Oxford University Labour Club has concluded that there were cultural problems and barriers to full Jewish inclusion, but not "institutional anti-Semitism." What does that mean? Nobody knows, since Labour refuses to actually publish the report. The author, Baronness Jen Royall, is not thrilled about her work being suppressed.
Melania Trump: Jewish reporter who received a torrent of anti-Semitic threats from Trump supporters "provoked them."
In the meantime, here are some things to clear off my browser.
* * *
A fun interview with Justice Clarence Thomas, dishing on his interests, his relationship with Justice Scalia, and his confirmation process.
The ADL will recognize the Ottoman Empire's genocide of Armenians at the turn of the 20th century. While recognizing that Turkey has an alarming inability to tell Jews apart when we advocate on this issue, I've long argued that this was a question of moral principle upon which the Jewish community cannot compromise.
An investigation into anti-Semitism at the Oxford University Labour Club has concluded that there were cultural problems and barriers to full Jewish inclusion, but not "institutional anti-Semitism." What does that mean? Nobody knows, since Labour refuses to actually publish the report. The author, Baronness Jen Royall, is not thrilled about her work being suppressed.
Melania Trump: Jewish reporter who received a torrent of anti-Semitic threats from Trump supporters "provoked them."
Sunday, April 12, 2015
Too Serious For Discussion
My stance on recognizing Turkey's genocide of the Armenians at the turn of the 20th century is pretty straight-forward: do it. Turkey is embarrassing itself far more by throwing a temper tantrum anytime anyone acknowledges historical fact than it would be if it actually decided to reckon with its past in an honest and forthright manner. Turkey needs to grow up, and all of us have an obligation to the truth. This isn't a tough call.
So for the most part, Turkey's latest fit over this issue -- stemming from Pope Francis' commemoration of the genocide -- is not particularly interesting. I note it here only to add to a growing collection I've noticed regarding how people use "moral seriousness" as a defensive move against moral critique:
So for the most part, Turkey's latest fit over this issue -- stemming from Pope Francis' commemoration of the genocide -- is not particularly interesting. I note it here only to add to a growing collection I've noticed regarding how people use "moral seriousness" as a defensive move against moral critique:
“I don’t support the word genocide being used by a great religious figure who has many followers,” said Mucahit Yucedal, 25. “Genocide is a serious allegation.”Now genocide is a serious allegation. But that, on its own, is no reason for Pope Francis to keep silent. If anything, it is more imperative that the Pope break through the silence that has emerged around this issue so that the victims can be properly remembered. But it is and remains interesting how people routinely argue that because an allegation is "serious", it should not be made at all.
Friday, September 09, 2011
Retaliatory Measures
The Israeli foreign ministry is contemplating various retaliatory measures against Turkey after the latter expelled the Israeli ambassador, cut military ties, and is threatening to provide military escort to any new flotilla seeking to break Israel's blockade of Gaza. It's typical Lieberman fare: pugnacious, probably counterproductive, and forcing the Prime Minister's office to distance itself. The main highlights are beginning cooperation with the PKK (a Kurdish terrorist organization working to establish an independent Kurdish state in Southeast Turkey), including potential weapons sales, and flooding the UN with complaints about Turkey's treatment of minorities (such as the Kurds).
I'm obviously not wild about supplying weapons to a recognized terrorist organization. But I will admit to finding ironically appealing sending a convey to southeast Turkey filled with Kurdish-language instruction books and other educational materials geared towards the Kurdish people. Totally non-violent "solidarity" measures, but I guarantee Turkey would flip out (Kurdish language and culture is heavily suppressed by the Turkish government). And hey, if we're talking about supporting national self-determination for local populations under the heel of another power, well, what's good for the goose....
As for the human rights complaints, both Israel and Turkey long have a habit of using such proclamations as proxies for diplomatic conflicts (see, e.g., declarations regarding the Armenia genocide). Still, it's not as if there aren't serious points of concern that deserve public airing: For example, the Turkish prime minister threatened to expel 100,000 undocumented ethnic Armenians if resolutions regarding said genocide were passed (ironic, no?).
On the other hand, there is no reason to think that UN human rights bodies will give Turkey anything but a clean bill of health no matter how serious its violations are. After all, countries in the UNHRC's good graces can get away with quite a bit: Sri Lanka earned laudations for its actions against the Tamils in the midst of killing up to 1,000 civilians a day. There is no reason to think that the UN holds any particular interest in holding Turkey accountable for wrongdoing, and it will be particularly resistant to doing so when it seen as acting on Israel's instigation, so it is not clear what any Israeli complaints would accomplish.
I'm obviously not wild about supplying weapons to a recognized terrorist organization. But I will admit to finding ironically appealing sending a convey to southeast Turkey filled with Kurdish-language instruction books and other educational materials geared towards the Kurdish people. Totally non-violent "solidarity" measures, but I guarantee Turkey would flip out (Kurdish language and culture is heavily suppressed by the Turkish government). And hey, if we're talking about supporting national self-determination for local populations under the heel of another power, well, what's good for the goose....
As for the human rights complaints, both Israel and Turkey long have a habit of using such proclamations as proxies for diplomatic conflicts (see, e.g., declarations regarding the Armenia genocide). Still, it's not as if there aren't serious points of concern that deserve public airing: For example, the Turkish prime minister threatened to expel 100,000 undocumented ethnic Armenians if resolutions regarding said genocide were passed (ironic, no?).
On the other hand, there is no reason to think that UN human rights bodies will give Turkey anything but a clean bill of health no matter how serious its violations are. After all, countries in the UNHRC's good graces can get away with quite a bit: Sri Lanka earned laudations for its actions against the Tamils in the midst of killing up to 1,000 civilians a day. There is no reason to think that the UN holds any particular interest in holding Turkey accountable for wrongdoing, and it will be particularly resistant to doing so when it seen as acting on Israel's instigation, so it is not clear what any Israeli complaints would accomplish.
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Knesset Moves To Recognize Armenian Genocide
The Jerusalem Post reports that a Knesset bill officially recognizing Turkey's genocide of Armenians is moving forward. Historically, bills of this nature have stalled because of the importance of maintaining Israel's friendly relationship with Turkey. But now, with the two countries' ties at a historic nadir, that concern apparently has fallen off.
There was a similar reversal last year in the US Congress, where the House Foreign Relations Committee passed am Armenian genocide resolution, after years of seeing it narrowly fail. Jewish groups had historically been, at best, tepid with respect to the resolution, in part to assuage Turkey (which made it very clear that it would retaliate against Israel if Jewish groups didn't toe the line). As Turkey began to turn more aggressively against Israel that year, though, that leverage went away, and a major barrier to the resolution's passage disappeared with it.
Then and now, one can debate how much of this is "a diplomatic shot at Turkey draped in self-righteous clothing" versus "doing the right thing now that Turkey has already spent its leverage which had hitherto prevented it." Obviously, the latter is more noble than the former. But regardless, the important thing is that the victims be commemorated.
And as for Turkey, my message remains the same as its ever been: Grow up. Lot's of countries have horrible things in their history. It's true of the US, it's true of Israel, it's true of China -- it's probably true of every country -- and it's true of Turkey. Turkey has plenty of contemporary problems to deal with (e.g., it's Prime Minister threatening to expel its remaining Armenian population), but part of maturing as a nation is learning to deal with your past.*
* Which, incidentally, is part of why Israel's recent flurry of "anti-Naqba" legislation is so distressing.
There was a similar reversal last year in the US Congress, where the House Foreign Relations Committee passed am Armenian genocide resolution, after years of seeing it narrowly fail. Jewish groups had historically been, at best, tepid with respect to the resolution, in part to assuage Turkey (which made it very clear that it would retaliate against Israel if Jewish groups didn't toe the line). As Turkey began to turn more aggressively against Israel that year, though, that leverage went away, and a major barrier to the resolution's passage disappeared with it.
Then and now, one can debate how much of this is "a diplomatic shot at Turkey draped in self-righteous clothing" versus "doing the right thing now that Turkey has already spent its leverage which had hitherto prevented it." Obviously, the latter is more noble than the former. But regardless, the important thing is that the victims be commemorated.
And as for Turkey, my message remains the same as its ever been: Grow up. Lot's of countries have horrible things in their history. It's true of the US, it's true of Israel, it's true of China -- it's probably true of every country -- and it's true of Turkey. Turkey has plenty of contemporary problems to deal with (e.g., it's Prime Minister threatening to expel its remaining Armenian population), but part of maturing as a nation is learning to deal with your past.*
* Which, incidentally, is part of why Israel's recent flurry of "anti-Naqba" legislation is so distressing.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
The Sunday Return Roundup
Jill's been out of town this week, which means we missed both Project Runway and Hell's Kitchen. Tonight will be epic.
* * *
Tennessee Mosque opponents plan to argue that Islam is not a religion.
Pam Geller is, as Jeffrey Goldberg correctly adduces, a "vile, racist creature".
A Colorado woman is charged with destroying a controversial piece of art which she says demeaned Jesus.
Dana Milbank argues that Glenn Beck is the conspiracy-theorists go-to source for mainstream validation.
Jon Chait shoots down a ridiculous Christopher Hitchens post attributing the passage of a resolution condemning the Armenian genocide to the nefarious "Isreal Lobby". I'd also refer back to this post.
I find it quite outrageous the fury with which some Orthodox groups react to calling ordained (whoops, apparently that word is taboo too) female religious leaders "Rabbas".
* * *
Tennessee Mosque opponents plan to argue that Islam is not a religion.
Pam Geller is, as Jeffrey Goldberg correctly adduces, a "vile, racist creature".
A Colorado woman is charged with destroying a controversial piece of art which she says demeaned Jesus.
Dana Milbank argues that Glenn Beck is the conspiracy-theorists go-to source for mainstream validation.
Jon Chait shoots down a ridiculous Christopher Hitchens post attributing the passage of a resolution condemning the Armenian genocide to the nefarious "Isreal Lobby". I'd also refer back to this post.
I find it quite outrageous the fury with which some Orthodox groups react to calling ordained (whoops, apparently that word is taboo too) female religious leaders "Rabbas".
Friday, March 19, 2010
What If They All Went Away....
KJH is right, this is ironic:
The context, as noted, is the recent resolutions recognizing the Armenian genocide as a genocide. You can read my latest commentary on the matter here.
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has taken a harsh position against undocumented Armenian workers in Turkey, threatening to expel thousands amid tensions over allegations that Armenians were victims of “genocide” during the last days of the Ottoman Empire.
Resolutions passed recently in the United States and Sweden to brand the World War I killings as “genocide” undermine peace efforts with Armenia, Erdoğan said during his visit to London, according to excerpts from an interview with the BBC Turkish service published on the BBC Web site late Tuesday.
[...]
Referring to about 100,000 undocumented Armenians working in Turkey that Ankara has so far tolerated, Erdoğan said: “So what will I do tomorrow? If necessary, I will tell them ‘come on, back to your country’… I’m not obliged to keep them in my country. Those actions [on genocide resolutions] unfortunately have a negative impact on our sincere attitudes,” Agence France-Presse quoted him as saying.
The context, as noted, is the recent resolutions recognizing the Armenian genocide as a genocide. You can read my latest commentary on the matter here.
Friday, March 05, 2010
On Another Armenia Resolution
The House Foreign Affairs Committee narrowly passed a resolution declaring the 1915 mass killings of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire (now Turkey) a genocide. The Turks are, as is their wont, apoplectic.
My views on this issue are well-known and not particularly subtle. It is exceedingly important to recognize genocide as genocide. This is not simply a case of historical semantics -- the way that mass killings are remembered by history is a critical factor in deterring or enabling future perpetrators for enacting similar atrocities.
But the other thing I've been thinking about is this: while Turkey has threatened various retaliatory measures against the US whenever we inch towards official recognition of the Armenian genocide, there is a limit to how long they can do so. Turkey may withdraw overflight permission temporarily in protest, but do we really expect that in 3, 5, or 10 years, they'll still be denying us aid and pitching diplomatic fits over a House resolution passed years earlier? Yes, the prospect of losing some Turkish support in the region is intimidating. But once the resolution is out the door, the gains are locked in, while the losses are temporary and can be ridden out.
So you know what I say? Pass the damn bill.
My views on this issue are well-known and not particularly subtle. It is exceedingly important to recognize genocide as genocide. This is not simply a case of historical semantics -- the way that mass killings are remembered by history is a critical factor in deterring or enabling future perpetrators for enacting similar atrocities.
But the other thing I've been thinking about is this: while Turkey has threatened various retaliatory measures against the US whenever we inch towards official recognition of the Armenian genocide, there is a limit to how long they can do so. Turkey may withdraw overflight permission temporarily in protest, but do we really expect that in 3, 5, or 10 years, they'll still be denying us aid and pitching diplomatic fits over a House resolution passed years earlier? Yes, the prospect of losing some Turkish support in the region is intimidating. But once the resolution is out the door, the gains are locked in, while the losses are temporary and can be ridden out.
So you know what I say? Pass the damn bill.
Tuesday, July 08, 2008
Civil Rights Roundup: 07/08/08
Daily roundup of civil rights and related news
A new study confirms that having gay members in the military doesn't damage unit cohesion, or have any negative effects whatsoever.
Elie Wiesel testifies in case of assailant. He feared he was being kidnapped -- the perpetrator has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity.
A Turkish Studies Institute has been roiled by charges that its Turkish funders seek to suppress inquiry into the Armenian genocide.
Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales raised eyebrows the other day with an editorial on what Latinos want this election cycle. Attorney Raul Reyes wrote a response today that bears notice.
I was prepared to laugh at this editorial complaining of "age discrimination" in retirement mega-communities, but the author actually raises some valid points.
Rosa Brooks has a message: the constitution "doesn't contain any footnotes that say, "Note to our descendants: This Constitution is intended for easy times only. At the first sign of trouble, feed this document to your dog."
Tolerance of minorities: it's not just more just, it'll also make you happier!
It's something crits have been urging for years, and social service workers in Orange County are finally getting: different communities require different tactics if you want your services to reach the people.
The LA Times says that between 271 and 433 illegal immigrants are enrolled at the University of California. I say, if you're good enough to make it into the UC system, you're welcome in my community -- legal or illegal.
A controversy is brewing in Texas about a Mexican comic book whose main character is eerily reminscent of the "sambo" image of Black people. The local Black community is outraged that these comics are being sold in Wal-Mart; while some leaders in the Mexican community have responded that the sambo image does not exist in Mexican culture. Even if that's true (and I'd be interested in asking the Black population in Mexican about it), I think one Mexican immigrant parent they interviewed had the right line: he read it as a kid in Mexico, but he wouldn't want his own kids reading it. Different things have different meanings in different places -- pluralism means adjusting our behaviors accordingly.
Also in Texas, a Catholic Church has had its statutes and religious icons knocked over several times. What was originally assumed to be vandalism is now being investigated as a hate crime after a message was left: "You have been warned: don't worship idols."
The military is reforming its response to sexual assault reports. Given some of its past behavior in this field, I'm glad to hear it.
Woman arrested at public McCain event for holding McCain = Bush sign. She was reportedly standing on city property when she was arrested for "trespassing."
Jeweler settles lawsuit for discriminating against a former employee who wears a headscarf.
A rural Maryland town is being sued after it blocked a Muslim organization from building a temple and retreat within its borders.
Advocates are fighting for illegal immigrant day-workers cheated out of their wages. Under federal law, they have the same right as any other worker to sue for unpaid back wages.
A new study confirms that having gay members in the military doesn't damage unit cohesion, or have any negative effects whatsoever.
Elie Wiesel testifies in case of assailant. He feared he was being kidnapped -- the perpetrator has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity.
A Turkish Studies Institute has been roiled by charges that its Turkish funders seek to suppress inquiry into the Armenian genocide.
Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales raised eyebrows the other day with an editorial on what Latinos want this election cycle. Attorney Raul Reyes wrote a response today that bears notice.
I was prepared to laugh at this editorial complaining of "age discrimination" in retirement mega-communities, but the author actually raises some valid points.
Rosa Brooks has a message: the constitution "doesn't contain any footnotes that say, "Note to our descendants: This Constitution is intended for easy times only. At the first sign of trouble, feed this document to your dog."
Tolerance of minorities: it's not just more just, it'll also make you happier!
It's something crits have been urging for years, and social service workers in Orange County are finally getting: different communities require different tactics if you want your services to reach the people.
The LA Times says that between 271 and 433 illegal immigrants are enrolled at the University of California. I say, if you're good enough to make it into the UC system, you're welcome in my community -- legal or illegal.
A controversy is brewing in Texas about a Mexican comic book whose main character is eerily reminscent of the "sambo" image of Black people. The local Black community is outraged that these comics are being sold in Wal-Mart; while some leaders in the Mexican community have responded that the sambo image does not exist in Mexican culture. Even if that's true (and I'd be interested in asking the Black population in Mexican about it), I think one Mexican immigrant parent they interviewed had the right line: he read it as a kid in Mexico, but he wouldn't want his own kids reading it. Different things have different meanings in different places -- pluralism means adjusting our behaviors accordingly.
Also in Texas, a Catholic Church has had its statutes and religious icons knocked over several times. What was originally assumed to be vandalism is now being investigated as a hate crime after a message was left: "You have been warned: don't worship idols."
The military is reforming its response to sexual assault reports. Given some of its past behavior in this field, I'm glad to hear it.
Woman arrested at public McCain event for holding McCain = Bush sign. She was reportedly standing on city property when she was arrested for "trespassing."
Jeweler settles lawsuit for discriminating against a former employee who wears a headscarf.
A rural Maryland town is being sued after it blocked a Muslim organization from building a temple and retreat within its borders.
Advocates are fighting for illegal immigrant day-workers cheated out of their wages. Under federal law, they have the same right as any other worker to sue for unpaid back wages.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Private Action
Following up on the story of the kid who immigrated with his family from Armenia at age two, became valedictorian of his high school, and is now facing deportation -- Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) has introduced a private bill to allow him and his family to stay in the United States. It's apparently a long-shot, but we can only hope that 50 60 Senators, a majority of the House, and President Bush decide that sending away really smart kids from the country they've lived in nearly their entire lives is not particularly bright on our part.
Monday, June 02, 2008
God I Hate Misbehaving Two Year Olds
Look at this one! He had the temerity to immigrate from Armenia to America (the article doesn't make it clear if he was legal and his visa lapsed, or originally illegal). Sixteen years later he has virtually no knowledge of his "home" country -- but did become valedictorian of his high school class.
I agree -- the only proper response is to deport him. If you don't crack down on toddler misbehavior, they'll never learn. And if there's one thing America needs less of, it's really smart people.
I agree -- the only proper response is to deport him. If you don't crack down on toddler misbehavior, they'll never learn. And if there's one thing America needs less of, it's really smart people.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Interesting Figure
James Russell, a top authority on Armenia at Harvard University, is an interesting fellow.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
On the Armenia Resolution
The House Foreign Relations Committee just passed a resolution labeling as "genocide" the WWI Turkish killing of Armenians. The vote was 27-21 (if anyone has the vote breakdown, I'd be obliged). Such resolutions have passed House committees before, but never made it to the full body for a vote. That looks to change this time, as Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has a large Armenian-American constituency and is thus strongly committed to getting it passed.
Publius offers the standard, mature view (taken by every living Secretary of State, incidentally), that this is not the right time. Turkey is one of our closet Muslim allies. Moreover, unlike quotation mark "allies" like Saudi Arabia, it is a bona fide liberal, democratic Islamic state. It also is one of the few Muslim states to recognize and have diplomatic relations with Israel -- a relationship it has been issuing veiled threats against in the event that this resolution passes. And it happens to border Iraq, where it could if it so desired cause all manner of trouble under the pretext of dealing with its "Kurdish problem." This event happened a long time ago, Publius argues, so why stir up the fuss?
My first response, I admit, is emotional. Turkey's absolutely childish reaction to simply acknowledging historical fact is unbelievably grating to me, and at this point the inevitable temper tantrum they've threatened to throw is a perk, not a disadvantage, to me. As I wrote back in August when Turkey wanted to "send a message" to American Jews about the implications of this vote, my own message back to them is "grow up". It's long since time. And if they want to enter societal adulthood kicking and screaming, well, so much the worse for them.
But more substantively, contra Publius I think recognizing past human rights atrocities -- particularly those in which the perpetrators have tried desperately to deny their crimes -- has significant contemporary import. I'm reminded of this excerpt from Charles Briggs:
The people who contemplate genocide pay attention to how society has reacted to similar events in the past. Hitler, we recall, was encouraged in his own Final Solution because "who remembers the Armenians?" When genocidal regimes perceive that they can infinitely stave off the day of reckoning for their actions via a variety of diplomatic shuffles, threats, and bluster, we lose one of the few non-military deterrents we have to the violence. Particularly in this age, where it has become clear that the world community either doesn't have the heart or stomach to physically intervene to stop genocide, it becomes all the more important to utilize whatever resources we have in our arsenal to stave them off before they occur. In this fight, moral suasion is a surprisingly effective weapon -- but only if it is known that it will be deployed.
And what of the opposition of all the Secretaries of State? I think it's important to understand where they're coming from. Certainly, passing this resolution would make their jobs harder. Turkey undoubtedly will retaliate as best it can, and this will harm many vital US interests across the board. I concede that. But guess what? Our diplomats aren't supposed to have easy jobs. They're supposed to do their jobs. And their job is to negotiate American interests and morals within an ethical framework we set up that, on occasion, obliges us to do things that make our life harder. It might be easier for us to crush the insurgency in Iraq if we were willing to carpet-bomb the nation. But we recognize that "ease of victory" is not the only consideration. Basic ethical guarantees -- such as that genocide should be recognized and its perpetrators should not get a free pass -- should not be seen as chess pieces to be manipulated to our greatest advantage. They should be built into the playing field as part of the reality our diplomats have to deal with. It's tougher terrain than if we simply jettisoned ethics all together. But you know what? Sometimes, that's what it means to be the good guy in the world.
Publius offers the standard, mature view (taken by every living Secretary of State, incidentally), that this is not the right time. Turkey is one of our closet Muslim allies. Moreover, unlike quotation mark "allies" like Saudi Arabia, it is a bona fide liberal, democratic Islamic state. It also is one of the few Muslim states to recognize and have diplomatic relations with Israel -- a relationship it has been issuing veiled threats against in the event that this resolution passes. And it happens to border Iraq, where it could if it so desired cause all manner of trouble under the pretext of dealing with its "Kurdish problem." This event happened a long time ago, Publius argues, so why stir up the fuss?
My first response, I admit, is emotional. Turkey's absolutely childish reaction to simply acknowledging historical fact is unbelievably grating to me, and at this point the inevitable temper tantrum they've threatened to throw is a perk, not a disadvantage, to me. As I wrote back in August when Turkey wanted to "send a message" to American Jews about the implications of this vote, my own message back to them is "grow up". It's long since time. And if they want to enter societal adulthood kicking and screaming, well, so much the worse for them.
But more substantively, contra Publius I think recognizing past human rights atrocities -- particularly those in which the perpetrators have tried desperately to deny their crimes -- has significant contemporary import. I'm reminded of this excerpt from Charles Briggs:
[D]ebates about genocide are themselves political events that bear powerfully on creating, legitimating, and challenging violence.... Actions generally come to be referred to as genocides -- and as 'events' -- post facto. The labeling shapes how they are perceived and remembered and their implications for the future. Constructing an event as genocide places it in relationship to other acts and creates conduits for the circulation of accusations. The architects of genocide are often as concerned with suppressing discourse about the event as with the killing itself. [Charles Briggs, "Genocide," in A Companion to Racial and Ethnic Studies, David Theo Goldberg & John Solomos, eds., (Oxford: Blackwell 2002), 38]
The people who contemplate genocide pay attention to how society has reacted to similar events in the past. Hitler, we recall, was encouraged in his own Final Solution because "who remembers the Armenians?" When genocidal regimes perceive that they can infinitely stave off the day of reckoning for their actions via a variety of diplomatic shuffles, threats, and bluster, we lose one of the few non-military deterrents we have to the violence. Particularly in this age, where it has become clear that the world community either doesn't have the heart or stomach to physically intervene to stop genocide, it becomes all the more important to utilize whatever resources we have in our arsenal to stave them off before they occur. In this fight, moral suasion is a surprisingly effective weapon -- but only if it is known that it will be deployed.
And what of the opposition of all the Secretaries of State? I think it's important to understand where they're coming from. Certainly, passing this resolution would make their jobs harder. Turkey undoubtedly will retaliate as best it can, and this will harm many vital US interests across the board. I concede that. But guess what? Our diplomats aren't supposed to have easy jobs. They're supposed to do their jobs. And their job is to negotiate American interests and morals within an ethical framework we set up that, on occasion, obliges us to do things that make our life harder. It might be easier for us to crush the insurgency in Iraq if we were willing to carpet-bomb the nation. But we recognize that "ease of victory" is not the only consideration. Basic ethical guarantees -- such as that genocide should be recognized and its perpetrators should not get a free pass -- should not be seen as chess pieces to be manipulated to our greatest advantage. They should be built into the playing field as part of the reality our diplomats have to deal with. It's tougher terrain than if we simply jettisoned ethics all together. But you know what? Sometimes, that's what it means to be the good guy in the world.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Indirect Diplomacy
Turkey to Israel: Get US Jews to back down on the Armenian genocide issues.
Speaking as an American Jew, I'd like to forward my own message to Turkey (which Israel is welcome to pass along, if it so desires): screw you.
And grow up. It does a lot more damage to your national pride to deny the genocide your nation committed than it would be to own up to it and begin the difficult, but necessary, process of reconciliation and renewal.
Speaking as an American Jew, I'd like to forward my own message to Turkey (which Israel is welcome to pass along, if it so desires): screw you.
And grow up. It does a lot more damage to your national pride to deny the genocide your nation committed than it would be to own up to it and begin the difficult, but necessary, process of reconciliation and renewal.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Jews are Jews
Turkey has made some diplomatic moves towards Israel to register its displeasure at the Anti-Defamation League's recent reversal of its stance on the Armenian genocide. People have kind of taken it as a given that Turkey would do this (and this was one of the primary reasons the ADL held off on taking this position until now). But I have to ask: does Turkey recognize that the ADL is not an arm of the Israeli government? That they can take separate positions on issues? As Matt Yglesias says, its perfectly understandable why Israel might take more of a hard-nosed realist approach to this issue, without demanding that American Jewish groups do the same. But this conflation of every Jewish institution as if they were part of one large meta-structure is uncomfortable to me.
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Genocide Denial
Adding to the list of cases where Jewish institutions are taking intolerable positions is the--shall we say tepidity?--of many American Jewish organizations to the demands of the Armenian community that America recognize the Turkish genocide against their people during World War I. The mass slaughter of 1.5 million people was, along with the Holocaust, one of the events that motivated Raphael Lemkin to coin the term "genocide," and the failure of people to remember the butchering convinced Hitler that nobody would mind his destruction of European Jewry. Though there is significant documentary evidence indicating that a genocide did occur, the Turkish government fiercely denies it, calls the debate an insult to its national pride, and has veiled threats of retaliation against any government or group that recognizes the event as a "genocide."
Michael Crowley wrote an excellent expose documenting the fierce lobbying that surrounds the issue in Congress. One would think that American Jewish groups, who have been so important in raising the consciousness of genocide issues and rallying around "never again", would be at the fore of those demanding recognition. You'd be wrong:
Alan Wolfe also notes that the ADL has fired its New England Regional Director for insisting on recognizing the genocide, which led to the resignation-in-protest of several board members.
The ADL does appear to have recently flipped, issuing a statement saying that "the painful events of 1915-1918 perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire against the Armenians... were indeed tantamount to genocide. If the word genocide had existed then, they would have called it genocide." But they also stress the need to avoid confrontation with Turkey, which has been one of Israel's few Muslim allies in the world.
Look, Turkey's friendship is important (for Israel and the US). But at what cost does it come? David Harris reminds us that allowing the Armenian Genocide to be held in limbo as "up for debate" doesn't bode well for those who wish to banish Holocaust denial from the realm of respectable conversation. "Picture a day," he tells us, "when a muscle-flexing Iran or Saudi Arabia seeks to make denial of the Holocaust a condition of doing business with other countries."
Jews have an obligation to the truth--on this issue more than most. Might it strain our relationship with Turkey? Possibly--though honestly, my response to them is to grow up. But in any event, there is a deep-seated ethical obligation on this issue that cannot be ignored or negotiated away. Gaining recognition of the Armenian genocide should be a top priority for the Jewish community. One cannot have "never again" when nothing is recognized to have happened in the first place.
Michael Crowley wrote an excellent expose documenting the fierce lobbying that surrounds the issue in Congress. One would think that American Jewish groups, who have been so important in raising the consciousness of genocide issues and rallying around "never again", would be at the fore of those demanding recognition. You'd be wrong:
Earning a special commendation for dubious behavior is Washington's Jewish-American lobby. In one of this tale's strangest twists, the Turks have convinced prominent Jewish groups, not typically indifferent to charges of genocide, to mute their opinions. In February, Turkey's foreign minister convened a meeting at a Washington hotel with more than a dozen leaders of major Jewish groups. Most prominent groups now take no official position on the resolution, including B'nai B'rith, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (aipac), and the American Jewish Committee. The issue "belongs to historians and not a resolution in Congress," explains Anti-Defamation League director Abe Foxman, who outright opposes the resolution. "It will resolve nothing." But it's also clear that Turkey's status as Israel's lone Muslim ally counts for a lot, too. "I think a lot of Israelis agree," Foxman told me. (One person involved in the fight offers a more cynical explanation: "Jewish groups don't want to give up their ownership of the term genocide.'")
The Turks have also conspicuously hired some lobbyists with strong Jewish ties. Their payroll includes a Washington firm called Southfive Strategies, which bills itself as "a Washington D.C. consulting boutique with access to the White House, congressional leadership, and influential media organizations." Southfive is run by Jason Epstein, a former Capitol Hill lobbyist for B'nai B'rith, and Lenny Ben-David, an Israeli-born former deputy chief of mission at Israel's Washington embassy and a longtime aipac staffer whose previous firm, IsraelConsult, also worked for Turkey.
Some Jewish leaders, to be sure, find such realpolitik less than tasteful. "It is obscene for us, of all people, to quibble about definitions," one prominent California rabbi recently told the Jewish Journal. But, when I asked one Jewish-American aligned with the Turks whether he truly believes that genocide didn't take place, he stammered that "the verdict" is not in, before adding, "If you're asking do I sleep at night, I do."
Alan Wolfe also notes that the ADL has fired its New England Regional Director for insisting on recognizing the genocide, which led to the resignation-in-protest of several board members.
The ADL does appear to have recently flipped, issuing a statement saying that "the painful events of 1915-1918 perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire against the Armenians... were indeed tantamount to genocide. If the word genocide had existed then, they would have called it genocide." But they also stress the need to avoid confrontation with Turkey, which has been one of Israel's few Muslim allies in the world.
Look, Turkey's friendship is important (for Israel and the US). But at what cost does it come? David Harris reminds us that allowing the Armenian Genocide to be held in limbo as "up for debate" doesn't bode well for those who wish to banish Holocaust denial from the realm of respectable conversation. "Picture a day," he tells us, "when a muscle-flexing Iran or Saudi Arabia seeks to make denial of the Holocaust a condition of doing business with other countries."
Jews have an obligation to the truth--on this issue more than most. Might it strain our relationship with Turkey? Possibly--though honestly, my response to them is to grow up. But in any event, there is a deep-seated ethical obligation on this issue that cannot be ignored or negotiated away. Gaining recognition of the Armenian genocide should be a top priority for the Jewish community. One cannot have "never again" when nothing is recognized to have happened in the first place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
