[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 155 (Monday, October 15, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H11542-H11546]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page H11542]]
              HOUSE RESOLUTION 106, THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 18, 2007, the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Ms. FOXX. 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.

                              {time}  2030

  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.

[[Page H11543]]

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

[[Page H11544]]

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

                              {time}  2045

  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

[[Page H11545]]

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.

                              {time}  2100

  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.
                                  ____


               [From the Washington Post, Oct. 10, 2007]

 Worse Than Irrelevant: A congressional Resolution About Massacres in 
        Turkey 90 Years Ago Endangers Present-Day U.S. Security.

       It's easy to dismiss a nonbinding congressional resolution 
     accusing Turkey of ``genocide'' against Armenians during 
     World War I as frivolous. Though the subject is a serious 
     one--more than 1 million Armenians may have died at the hands 
     of the Young Turk regime between 1915 and the early 1920s--
     House Democrats pushing for a declaration on the subject have 
     petty and parochial interests. Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-
     Calif.), the chief sponsor, says he has more than 70,000 
     ethnic Armenians in his Los Angeles district. Speaker Nancy 
     Pelosi (D-Calif.), who has promised to bring the measure to a 
     vote on the House floor, has important Armenian American 
     campaign contributors. How many House members can be expected 
     to carefully weigh Mr. Schiff's one-sided ``findings'' about 
     long-ago events in Anatolia?
       The problem is that any congressional action will be taken 
     in deadly earnest by Turkey's powerful nationalist 
     politicians and therefore by its government, which is already 
     struggling to resist a tidal wave of anti-Americanism in the 
     country. Turkey's prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, 
     called President Bush on Friday to warn against the 
     resolution. Turkish politicians are predicting that responses 
     to passage by the House could include denial of U.S. access 
     to Turkey's Incirlik air base, a key staging point for 
     military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Turkish 
     parliament could also throw off longstanding U.S. constraints 
     and mandate an invasion of northern Iraq to attack Kurdish 
     separatists there, something that could destabilize the only 
     region of Iraq that is currently peaceful.
       No wonder eight former secretaries of state, including 
     Henry A. Kissinger, James A. Baker III, George P. Shultz and 
     Madeleine K. Albright, have urged Ms. Pelosi to drop the 
     resolution, saying it ``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.'' Yet the measure is proceeding: 
     It is due to be voted on today by the House Foreign Affairs 
     Committee.
       Supporters say congressional action is justified by the 
     refusal of the Turkish government to accept the truth of the 
     crimes against Armenians, and its criminalization of 
     statements describing those events as genocide. It's true 
     that Turkey's military and political class has been 
     inexcusably slow to come to terms with that history, and 
     virulent nationalism--not Islamism--may be the country's most 
     dangerous political force. 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 genocide resolution cannot be called frivolous. In 
     fact, its passage would be dangerous and grossly 
     irresponsible.

           Letter by Secretaries of Defense to Speaker Pelosi

     September 7, 2007.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Speaker, House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Madam Speaker: 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 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 
     capabilities, 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

[[Page H11546]]

     Turkey would surely be restricted by a 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.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Frank Carlucci.
                                                    William Cohen.
     William Perry.

                          ____________________