U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

38–188PDF 2008

AFFIRMATION OF THE UNITED STATES RECORD

ON THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE RESOLUTION

MARKUP

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON

H. Res. 106

OCTOBER 10, 2007

Serial No. 110–123

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

TOM LANTOS, California, Chairman 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California 

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

ROBERT WEXLER, Florida 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

BILL DELAHUNT, Massachusetts 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

DIANE E. WATSON, California 

ADAM SMITH, Washington 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

JOHN S. TANNER, Tennessee 

GENE GREEN, Texas 

LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California 

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas 

RUBE ́ N HINOJOSA, Texas 

JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York 

DAVID WU, Oregon 

BRAD MILLER, North Carolina 

LINDA T. SA ́ NCHEZ, California 

DAVID SCOTT, Georgia 

JIM COSTA, California 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GABRIELLE GIFFORDS, Arizona 

RON KLEIN, Florida 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

DAN BURTON, Indiana 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado 

RON PAUL, Texas 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

J. GRESHAM BARRETT, South Carolina 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

BOB INGLIS, South Carolina 

LUIS G. FORTUN ̃ O, Puerto Rico 

GUS BILIRAKIS, Florida 

ROBERT R. KING, Staff Director 

YLEEM POBLETE, Republican Staff Director 

DAVID S. ABRAMOWITZ, Chief Counsel 

LAURA RUSH, Professional Staff Member/Security Officer 

GENELL BROWN, Full Committee Hearing Coordinator 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

MARKUP OF 

H. Res. 106, Calling upon the President to ensure that the foreign policy 

of the United States reflects appropriate understanding and sensitivity 

concerning issues related to human rights, ethnic cleansing, and genocide 

documented in the United States record relating to the Armenian Genocide, 

and for other purposes ......................................................................................... 3

APPENDIX 

The Honorable Brad Sherman, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of California: Prepared statement ...................................................................... 53

The Honorable Jim Costa, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

California: Prepared statement ........................................................................... 55

(1)

AFFIRMATION OF THE UNITED STATES 

RECORD ON THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE 

RESOLUTION 

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2007

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:32 p.m., in room 

2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Tom Lantos (chairman 

of the committee) presiding. 

Chairman LANTOS. The committee will come to order. We will 

close the doors. Before proceeding to our scheduled business today, 

I wish to recognize the sad passing of one of our dear colleagues, 

the gentlelady from Virginia, Jo Ann Davis. Mrs. Davis was a valued member of this committee. She showed a strong and passionate 

commitment to U.S. foreign policy, closely following our activities 

even as she battled her illness. She served as chair of the United 

States Congressional Delegation of the Trans-Atlantic Legislators 

Dialogue from 2003 to 2006, leading meetings with members of the 

European Parliament in Rome, Dublin, and Vienna, as well as several here in the United States. 

I know I speak for all members of our committee when I say that 

Jo Ann will be deeply missed by many on the international scene, 

as well as by all of her colleagues here in Congress. Would my colleague like to say a few words? 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And 

today I also would like to join so many of our colleagues in honoring and remembering our departed colleague and friend, Congresswoman Jo Ann Davis of Virginia. As the two Republican 

women on this committee, Jo Ann and I worked on many issues of 

great importance for our country, the United States. I was honored 

to witness the extent of her devotion to the people of her district, 

her Commonwealth, and her beloved country. People commonly use 

the term public servant to refer to those who hold elected office. As 

Members of Congress, we try our best to live up to that title, but 

Mr. Chairman, Jo Ann Davis personified it. She was, at her essence, a public servant. Simply by being elected, Jo Ann made history by being the first Republican woman from Virginia to serve in 

the House of Representatives. Not content to rest on her laurels, 

Jo Ann proceeded to commit herself unyieldingly to America’s national security. 

A minority of Members of Congress serve on the Committees on 

Foreign Affairs, Armed Services, or Intelligence. During her tragVerDate Mar 21 2002 14:49 Jan 04, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\FULL\101007M\38188.000 DOUG PsN: DOUG
2

ically short 7-year tenure, Jo Ann served on all three committees 

and with great distinction, including her present position as ranking member of the Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness, 

and as a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee’s Subcommittee 

on Western Hemisphere as well as on the Middle East and South 

Asia Subcommittee. 

As a member of our Foreign Affairs Committee, Jo Ann not only 

co-sponsored legislation and attended numerous hearings on pressing national security matters, but she dedicated herself to the vital, 

yet often-overlooked, Atlantic alliance, leading delegations of representatives to meet with our counterparts in the European Parliament through the Trans-Atlantic Legislators Dialogue from the 

years 2003 to 2006. 

Just this past weekend, Mr. Chairman, the Trans-Atlantic Legislators Dialogue met and her presence was greatly missed. At this 

time, what we feel most is an overwhelming sense of loss, a personal loss for our committee, a loss for our Congress, a loss for our 

country. Our thoughts and our hearts are of course with her husband, Chuck, and her two sons, her granddaughter, and her entire 

family. But as we mourn and miss her, we can take comfort in the 

knowledge that ours is and remains a world in which someone like 

Jo Ann Davis can exist, and indeed make a difference. Thank you, 

Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman LANTOS. I thank my colleague for her eloquent statement. And I now ask for a moment of silence in memory of our departed colleague, Jo Ann Davis. 

[Moment of silence observed.] 

Chairman LANTOS. Thank you. On a happier note, I want to welcome back to the committee the gentleman from Missouri, the distinguished minority whip, my good friend, Mr. Blunt, who was appointed today to replace Mrs. Davis. We are delighted and honored 

to have you, Mr. Blunt. 

Pursuant to notice, I call up the bill, H. Res. 106, calling upon 

the President to ensure that the foreign policy of the United States 

reflects appropriate understanding and sensitivity concerning 

issues related to human rights, ethnic cleansing, and genocide documented in the United States record relating to the Armenian 

genocide, and for other purposes, for purposes of markup. 

[H. Res. 106 follows:] 

3

1

IV

110TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 106

Calling upon the President to ensure that the foreign policy of the United

States reflects appropriate understanding and sensitivity concerning

issues related to human rights, ethnic cleansing, and genocide documented in the United States record relating to the Armenian Genocide,

and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 30, 2007

Mr. SCHIFF (for himself, Mr. RADANOVICH, Mr. PALLONE, Mr. KNOLLENBERG, Mr. SHERMAN, and Mr. MCCOTTER) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

RESOLUTION

Calling upon the President to ensure that the foreign policy

of the United States reflects appropriate understanding

and sensitivity concerning issues related to human rights,

ethnic cleansing, and genocide documented in the United

States record relating to the Armenian Genocide, and

for other purposes.

1 Resolved,

2 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

3 This resolution may be cited as the ‘‘Affirmation of

4 the United States Record on the Armenian Genocide Reso5 lution’’.


38188a.AAB
4

2

•HRES 106 IH

1 SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

2 The House of Representatives finds the following:

3 (1) The Armenian Genocide was conceived and

4 carried out by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 to

5 1923, resulting in the deportation of nearly

6 2,000,000 Armenians, of whom 1,500,000 men,

7 women, and children were killed, 500,000 survivors

8 were expelled from their homes, and which succeeded

9 in the elimination of the over 2,500-year presence of

10 Armenians in their historic homeland.

11 (2) On May 24, 1915, the Allied Powers, Eng12 land, France, and Russia, jointly issued a statement

13 explicitly charging for the first time ever another

14 government of committing ‘‘a crime against human15 ity’’.

16 (3) This joint statement stated ‘‘the Allied Gov17 ernments announce publicly to the Sublime Porte

18 that they will hold personally responsible for these

19 crimes all members of the Ottoman Government, as

20 well as those of their agents who are implicated in

21 such massacres’’.

22 (4) The post-World War I Turkish Government

23 indicted the top leaders involved in the ‘‘organization

24 and execution’’ of the Armenian Genocide and in the

25 ‘‘massacre and destruction of the Armenians’’.


38188a.AAC
5

3

•HRES 106 IH

1 (5) In a series of courts-martial, officials of the

2 Young Turk Regime were tried and convicted, as

3 charged, for organizing and executing massacres

4 against the Armenian people.

5 (6) The chief organizers of the Armenian Geno6 cide, Minister of War Enver, Minister of the Interior

7 Talaat, and Minister of the Navy Jemal were all

8 condemned to death for their crimes, however, the

9 verdicts of the courts were not enforced.

10 (7) The Armenian Genocide and these domestic

11 judicial failures are documented with overwhelming

12 evidence in the national archives of Austria, France,

13 Germany, Great Britain, Russia, the United States,

14 the Vatican and many other countries, and this vast

15 body of evidence attests to the same facts, the same

16 events, and the same consequences.

17 (8) The United States National Archives and

18 Record Administration holds extensive and thorough

19 documentation on the Armenian Genocide, especially

20 in its holdings under Record Group 59 of the United

21 States Department of State, files 867.00 and

22 867.40, which are open and widely available to the

23 public and interested institutions.

24 (9) The Honorable Henry Morgenthau, United

25 States Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire from


38188a.AAD
6

4

•HRES 106 IH

1 1913 to 1916, organized and led protests by officials

2 of many countries, among them the allies of the

3 Ottoman Empire, against the Armenian Genocide.

4 (10) Ambassador Morgenthau explicitly de5 scribed to the United States Department of State

6 the policy of the Government of the Ottoman Em7 pire as ‘‘a campaign of race extermination,’’ and was

8 instructed on July 16, 1915, by United States Sec9 retary of State Robert Lansing that the ‘‘Depart10 ment approves your procedure . . . to stop Armenian

11 persecution’’.

12 (11) Senate Concurrent Resolution 12 of Feb13 ruary 9, 1916, resolved that ‘‘the President of the

14 United States be respectfully asked to designate a

15 day on which the citizens of this country may give

16 expression to their sympathy by contributing funds

17 now being raised for the relief of the Armenians’’,

18 who at the time were enduring ‘‘starvation, disease,

19 and untold suffering’’.

20 (12) President Woodrow Wilson concurred and

21 also encouraged the formation of the organization

22 known as Near East Relief, chartered by an Act of

23 Congress, which contributed some $116,000,000

24 from 1915 to 1930 to aid Armenian Genocide surVerDate Mar 21 2002 14:49 Jan 04, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\FULL\101007M\38188.000 DOUG PsN: DOUG

38188a.AAE
7

5

•HRES 106 IH

1 vivors, including 132,000 orphans who became foster

2 children of the American people.

3 (13) Senate Resolution 359, dated May 11,

4 1920, stated in part, ‘‘the testimony adduced at the

5 hearings conducted by the sub-committee of the Sen6 ate Committee on Foreign Relations have clearly es7 tablished the truth of the reported massacres and

8 other atrocities from which the Armenian people

9 have suffered’’.

10 (14) The resolution followed the April 13, 1920,

11 report to the Senate of the American Military Mis12 sion to Armenia led by General James Harbord, that

13 stated ‘‘[m]utilation, violation, torture, and death

14 have left their haunting memories in a hundred

15 beautiful Armenian valleys, and the traveler in that

16 region is seldom free from the evidence of this most

17 colossal crime of all the ages’’.

18 (15) As displayed in the United States Holo19 caust Memorial Museum, Adolf Hitler, on ordering

20 his military commanders to attack Poland without

21 provocation in 1939, dismissed objections by saying

22 ‘‘[w]ho, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of

23 the Armenians?’’ and thus set the stage for the Hol24 ocaust.


38188a.AAF
8

6

•HRES 106 IH

1 (16) Raphael Lemkin, who coined the term

2 ‘‘genocide’’ in 1944, and who was the earliest pro3 ponent of the United Nations Convention on the

4 Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, invoked the

5 Armenian case as a definitive example of genocide in

6 the 20th century.

7 (17) The first resolution on genocide adopted

8 by the United Nations at Lemkin’s urging, the De9 cember 11, 1946, United Nations General Assembly

10 Resolution 96(1) and the United Nations Convention

11 on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide itself

12 recognized the Armenian Genocide as the type of

13 crime the United Nations intended to prevent and

14 punish by codifying existing standards.

15 (18) In 1948, the United Nations War Crimes

16 Commission invoked the Armenian Genocide ‘‘pre17 cisely . . . one of the types of acts which the modern

18 term ‘crimes against humanity’ is intended to cover’’

19 as a precedent for the Nuremberg tribunals.

20 (19) The Commission stated that ‘‘[t]he provi21 sions of Article 230 of the Peace Treaty of Sevres

22 were obviously intended to cover, in conformity with

23 the Allied note of 1915 . . ., offenses which had been

24 committed on Turkish territory against persons of

25 Turkish citizenship, though of Armenian or Greek


38188a.AAG
9

7

•HRES 106 IH

1 race. This article constitutes therefore a precedent

2 for Article 6c and 5c of the Nuremberg and Tokyo

3 Charters, and offers an example of one of the cat4 egories of ‘crimes against humanity’ as understood

5 by these enactments’’.

6 (20) House Joint Resolution 148, adopted on

7 April 8, 1975, resolved: ‘‘[t]hat April 24, 1975, is

8 hereby designated as ‘National Day of Remembrance

9 of Man’s Inhumanity to Man’, and the President of

10 the United States is authorized and requested to

11 issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the

12 United States to observe such day as a day of re13 membrance for all the victims of genocide, especially

14 those of Armenian ancestry . . .’’.

15 (21) President Ronald Reagan in proclamation

16 number 4838, dated April 22, 1981, stated in part

17 ‘‘like the genocide of the Armenians before it, and

18 the genocide of the Cambodians, which followed it—

19 and like too many other persecutions of too many

20 other people—the lessons of the Holocaust must

21 never be forgotten’’.

22 (22) House Joint Resolution 247, adopted on

23 September 10, 1984, resolved: ‘‘[t]hat April 24,

24 1985, is hereby designated as ‘National Day of Re25 membrance of Man’s Inhumanity to Man’, and the


38188a.AAH
10

8

•HRES 106 IH

1 President of the United States is authorized and re2 quested to issue a proclamation calling upon the

3 people of the United States to observe such day as

4 a day of remembrance for all the victims of geno5 cide, especially the one and one-half million people of

6 Armenian ancestry . . .’’.

7 (23) In August 1985, after extensive study and

8 deliberation, the United Nations SubCommission on

9 Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Mi10 norities voted 14 to 1 to accept a report entitled

11 ‘‘Study of the Question of the Prevention and Pun12 ishment of the Crime of Genocide,’’ which stated

13 ‘‘[t]he Nazi aberration has unfortunately not been

14 the only case of genocide in the 20th century.

15 Among other examples which can be cited as quali16 fying are . . . the Ottoman massacre of Armenians

17 in 1915–1916’’.

18 (24) This report also explained that ‘‘[a]t least

19 1,000,000, and possibly well over half of the Arme20 nian population, are reliably estimated to have been

21 killed or death marched by independent authorities

22 and eye-witnesses. This is corroborated by reports in

23 United States, German and British archives and of

24 contemporary diplomats in the Ottoman Empire, in25 cluding those of its ally Germany.’’.


38188a.AAI
11

9

•HRES 106 IH

1 (25) The United States Holocaust Memorial

2 Council, an independent Federal agency, unani3 mously resolved on April 30, 1981, that the United

4 States Holocaust Memorial Museum would include

5 the Armenian Genocide in the Museum and has

6 since done so.

7 (26) Reviewing an aberrant 1982 expression

8 (later retracted) by the United States Department of

9 State asserting that the facts of the Armenian Geno10 cide may be ambiguous, the United States Court of

11 Appeals for the District of Columbia in 1993, after

12 a review of documents pertaining to the policy

13 record of the United States, noted that the assertion

14 on ambiguity in the United States record about the

15 Armenian Genocide ‘‘contradicted longstanding

16 United States policy and was eventually retracted’’.

17 (27) On June 5, 1996, the House of Represent18 atives adopted an amendment to House Bill 3540

19 (the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Re20 lated Programs Appropriations Act, 1997) to reduce

21 aid to Turkey by $3,000,000 (an estimate of its pay22 ment of lobbying fees in the United States) until the

23 Turkish Government acknowledged the Armenian

24 Genocide and took steps to honor the memory of its

25 victims.


38188a.AAJ
12

10

•HRES 106 IH

1 (28) President William Jefferson Clinton, on

2 April 24, 1998, stated: ‘‘This year, as in the past,

3 we join with Armenian-Americans throughout the

4 nation in commemorating one of the saddest chap5 ters in the history of this century, the deportations

6 and massacres of a million and a half Armenians in

7 the Ottoman Empire in the years 1915–1923.’’.

8 (29) President George W. Bush, on April 24,

9 2004, stated: ‘‘On this day, we pause in remem10 brance of one of the most horrible tragedies of the

11 20th century, the annihilation of as many as

12 1,500,000 Armenians through forced exile and mur13 der at the end of the Ottoman Empire.’’.

14 (30) Despite the international recognition and

15 affirmation of the Armenian Genocide, the failure of

16 the domestic and international authorities to punish

17 those responsible for the Armenian Genocide is a

18 reason why similar genocides have recurred and may

19 recur in the future, and that a just resolution will

20 help prevent future genocides.

21 SEC. 3. DECLARATION OF POLICY.

22 The House of Representatives—

23 (1) calls upon the President to ensure that the

24 foreign policy of the United States reflects appro25 priate understanding and sensitivity concerning


38188a.AAK
13

11

•HRES 106 IH

1 issues related to human rights, ethnic cleansing, and

2 genocide documented in the United States record re3 lating to the Armenian Genocide and the con4 sequences of the failure to realize a just resolution;

5 and

6 (2) calls upon the President in the President’s

7 annual message commemorating the Armenian

8 Genocide issued on or about April 24, to accurately

9 characterize the systematic and deliberate annihila10 tion of 1,500,000 Armenians as genocide and to re11 call the proud history of United States intervention

12 in opposition to the Armenian Genocide.

Æ


38188a.AAL
14

Chairman LANTOS. Without objection, the resolution is considered as read and I yield myself such time as I might consume. 

Today we are not considering whether the Armenian people were 

persecuted and died in huge numbers at the hands of Ottoman 

troops in the early 20th century. There is unanimity in the Congress and across the country that these atrocities took place. If the 

resolution before us stated that fact alone, it would pass unanimously. The controversy lies in whether to make it United States 

policy at this moment in history to apply a single word, ‘‘genocide,’’

to encompass this enormous blot on human history. 

The United Nations Convention on Genocide defines the term as 

a number of actions, and I quote, ‘‘committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious 

group.’’ These actions include killing or causing serious bodily or 

mental harm to members of the group, and deliberately inflicting 

on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical 

destruction in whole or in part. Henry Morgenthau, the U.S. Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire at the time of the atrocities wrote, 

and I am quoting:

‘‘I am confident that the whole history of the human race contains no such horrible episode as this. The great massacres and 

persecutions of the past seem almost insignificant when compared with the sufferings of the Armenian race in 1915.’’

The leadership of the United States has been in universal agreement in condemning the atrocities but has been divided about 

using the term ‘‘genocide.’’ On one occasion, President Ronald 

Reagan referred to, I quote, ‘‘the genocide of the Armenians,’’ but 

subsequent Presidents, George Herbert Walker Bush, Bill Clinton, 

and George W. Bush, have refrained from using the word out of 

deference to Turkish sentiments on the matter. In recognizing this 

tragedy, some in Congress have seen common themes with the debate our committee held earlier this year on a resolution about another historic injustice, the tens of thousands of so-called comfort 

women forced into sexual slavery by Imperial Japan. The current 

Japanese Government went to great lengths to attempt to prevent 

debate on that matter. And dire predictions were made that passage of such a resolution would harm United States-Japan relations. 

Those dire consequences never materialized. A key feature distinguishing today’s debate from the one on the comfort women resolution is that United States troops are currently engaged in wars in 

Iraq and Afghanistan. Our troops depend on a major Turkish air 

base for access to the fighting fronts and it serves as a critical part 

of the supply lines to those fronts. 

A growing majority in Congress, and I am among them, strongly 

oppose continued United States troop involvement in the civil war 

in Iraq, but none of us wants to see those supply lines threatened 

or abruptly cut. All eight living former Secretaries of State recently 

cautioned Congress on this matter, and I quote: ‘‘It is our view,’’

write former Secretaries Albright, Baker, Christopher, Eagleburger, Haig, Kissinger, Powell, and Shultz, ‘‘that passage of this resolution could endanger our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and damage efforts to promote reconciliation between Armenia and Turkey.’’

15

Three former Secretaries of Defense, Carlucci, Cohen, and Perry, 

this week advised Congress that passage of this resolution, and I 

quote again, ‘‘would have a direct detrimental effect on the operational capabilities, safety, and well being of our armed forces in 

Iraq and in Afghanistan.’’ Members of this committee have a sobering choice to make. We 

have to weigh the desire to express our solidarity with the Armenian people and to condemn this historic nightmare through the 

use of the word ‘‘genocide’’ against the risk that it could cause 

young men and women in the uniform of the United States Armed 

Services to pay an even heavier price than they are currently paying. This is a vote of conscience and the committee will work its 

will. I understand that the distinguished ranking Republican member, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, may not wish to make an opening statement. You will? I am delighted to yield to my friend and colleague 

from Florida. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Because I know 

that so many members wish to make opening statements, and we 

have competing committee responsibilities, I was not going to make 

an opening statement, but I know that this is such a serious issue 

for so many and I want to thank you for yielding me the time. As 

certainly the death of 1.5 million Armenians at the hands of the 

officials of the Ottoman Empire is a dark and horrific chapter in 

our human history, this committee’s consideration of House Resolution 106, affirmation of the United States’ record on the Armenian 

genocide resolution, is a very serious matter, particularly at this 

time, Mr. Chairman. 

This is a difficult issue, as you pointed out in your opening statement, and one where we must carefully evaluate a number of factors, including our commitment to justice and historical facts, the 

best strategy to advance reconciliation between Armenia and Turkey, as well as security, security interests that are so critical to the 

United States. As we discuss the resolution before us today, it is 

incumbent upon each and every one of us to carefully consider all 

of the factors and the possible implications involved in moving forward with this particular resolution at this particular time and the 

war that we are engaged in against Islamist extremists. 

I will vote against the resolution because of the damage to our 

capabilities in Iraq and in Afghanistan, where my daughter-in-law 

is serving as a United States military officer. It could damage our 

operations against Islamic extremists and our counternarcotics efforts in South Asia and Central Asia. And to ensure that all of our 

members have ample opportunities to express their support, Mr. 

Chairman, or raise concern about this measure, I will yield back 

the balance of my time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman LANTOS. Thank you very much. It is the intention of 

the chair that all members who wish to speak on this resolution 

will be recognized for 5 minutes. I now recognize one of the original 

co-sponsors of H. Res. 106, the gentleman from California, Mr. 

Sherman, for 5 minutes to explain the resolution. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for 

your outstanding review of history. My colleagues, we are here 

again considering an Armenian genocide resolution. Our committee 

has done this three times in the last decade, and once the Judiciary 

16

Committee dealt with a resolution crafted to meet its jurisdiction. 

We have never had a vote on the floor. And there are those that 

say that every time we discuss this resolution in committee it is 

an irritant to our relationship with Turkey. That is the best reason 

to vote for it here, and on the floor. Let us do this and be done with 

it. We will get a few angry words out of Ankara for a few days and 

then it is over. And I promise that the proponents of this resolution 

will not be back with another resolution after the House recognizes 

the Armenian genocide. In contrast, if we vote down this resolution 

today, the some 225-plus co-sponsors will be back next year, and 

the year after. If this irritates our relationship with Turkey, let us 

stop the irritation by recognizing the truth. 

Two years ago, we dealt with an identical resolution. The history 

is the same. The words of the resolution are exactly the same. The 

geopolitical situation is the same. Turkey has the same border with 

Iraq that it had 2 years ago. This committee’s role is the same, 

which is to speak truth on human rights abuses even when our 

friends object. And we proved that again with regard to those 

called ‘‘comfort women,’’ which the chairman referred to. Only one 

thing has changed and that is that a ferocious lobbying effort has 

been brought to this committee. 

Two years ago, we passed this exact same resolution 40-7 and we 

ought to have a similar vote here today. What happened in 1915 

to 1923? The population of Armenians in the area now encompassed by Turkey was some 2 million; 8 years later, it was virtually zero. Our Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, which the 

chairman quoted, said it clearly when he said, ‘‘When the authorities gave the orders for these deportations they were merely giving 

the death warrant to a whole race. They understood this well, and 

in their conversations with me, they made no particular attempt to 

conceal that fact.’’ Or we can turn to Mustafa Arif, the last Minister of the Interior of the Ottoman Empire, speaking just after 

World War I and reflecting on the recent actions of his own government. He said, ‘‘Our wartime leaders decided to exterminate the 

Armenians, and they did exterminate them.’’

This clearly meets the United Nations’ definition and every other 

definition of genocide. In fact, the human rights attorney who 

coined the word ‘‘genocide’’ applied it directly to the Armenian 

genocide. It is right for Congress to recognize this genocide. We 

must do it. Genocide denial is not just the last step of a genocide, 

it is the first step in the next genocide. When Hitler had to convince his cohorts that the world would let them get away with it, 

he turned to them and said, ‘‘Who today speaks of the annihilation 

of the Armenians?’’ Opponents say that Turkey will be angry if we 

pass this resolution. Japan lobbied against the resolution that the 

chairman referred to. 

This committee has passed resolutions criticizing such great allies as England and Canada. But let me give you a hypothetical. 

Say there is a new regime in Germany with a different view of 

world history that demands that we tear down the Holocaust Museum? Who would go to the floor and say, ‘‘We need Ramstein Air 

Force Base in Germany, let us tear down the Holocaust Museum’’? 

We cannot provide genocide denial as one of the perks of friendship 

with the United States. We are told that if we pass this resolution, 

17

Turkey will react. Turkey’s long-standing practice is to try to win 

through intimidation. But every time a resolution is passed they 

then get on with it. Despite threats of harsh retribution, Turkey 

has either taken no steps or only token diplomatic steps against so 

many nations that have officially recognized Armenian genocide, 

including: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, and Argentina. 

Some 40 United States’ States have recognized the Armenian 

genocide and trade between those individual States and Turkey 

has blossomed, including my own State of California. The best example is the big battle in the French Parliament. In 2001, Turkey 

threatened France with a boycott of French goods. The result: 

France passed the genocide resolution and Turkey’s imports from 

France skyrocketed, even tripled, as shown in this chart in just a 

few years. In addition, Turkey’s bilateral trade increased significantly—— Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. SHERMAN [continuing]. With so many other countries that 

have adopted the Armenian genocide resolution. 

Chairman LANTOS. I recognize the gentleman from New Jersey, 

Mr. Smith. 

Mr. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, in September 2000, I chaired a hearing on the 

Armenian genocide resolution, H. Res. 398, that had been introduced by Mr. Radanovich, Mr. Bonior, and Mr. Rogan. It was the 

first hearing this House had ever held on the Armenian genocide. 

Great lengths and great pains were taken to be accurate, to provide 

information that could be proven on the record, and yet there was 

a major counter effort undertaken not even to have a hearing at 

all. The resolution, as I think all of us know, never made it even 

to the floor. In that case, the Clinton White House had weighed in 

and blocked the resolution. 

The issues behind the resolution today is that whenever any government denies a genocide, whether or not Congress has a responsibility to insist that our Government at least, at the very least, acknowledge the atrocity. Mr. Chairman, I believe that we do. In 

1915, there were about 2 million Armenians living in what was 

then the Ottoman Empire. They were living in a region that they 

had inhabited for 2,500 years. By 1923, well over 90 percent of 

these Armenians had disappeared. Most of them, as many as 1.5 

million, were dead. The remainder had been forced into exile. The 

government of the empire, whose leaders were members of the 

movement known as the Young Turks, called this campaign 

against the Armenians a mass deportation rather than the mass 

murder that it was. And the United States Ambassador to Turkey 

at the time, Henry Morgenthau, called it a campaign of race extermination. The British, French, and Russian Governments accused 

the Young Turk Government of crimes against humanity, the first 

time in history that that charge had ever been made by one state 

against another. 

After World War I, the term ‘‘genocide’’ didn’t exist, but the 

whole world understood what had been done to the Armenians and 

who was responsible. The Government of Turkey tried and convicted a number of high-ranking Young Turk officials for their role 

18

in the Turkish Government’s indictment in what they called ‘‘the 

massacre and destruction of the Armenians.’’

Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, memories fade and later generations chose another course. Now there are many who deny that the 

Armenian genocide ever happened. Today in Turkey—and I would 

ask members to look at the Country Reports on Human Rights 

Practices, the State Department chronicling of abuse—there is one 

journalist, one novelist after another who is indicted for simply 

talking about the Armenian genocide. Hopefully today, members 

will not be deterred from voting for this resolution. 

There are members now or people in Turkey who say that what 

happened was during wartime, or it was the fault of both sides, or 

that the Armenians sympathized with the enemies of the Ottoman 

Empire, or that the atrocities were the random acts of a few people, 

not authorized by the central government. Yet after World War I, 

the Turkey Government’s indictment said that the destruction of 

the Armenians was ‘‘the result of the decision-making of the central committee.’’ In other words, it was planned, it was premeditated, and they carried it out with terrible and horrific consequences. 

The sad truth is that the modern Government of Turkey refuses 

to come to terms with this genocide. The Turkish Government consistently and aggressively refuses to acknowledge the Armenian 

genocide. For Armenians everywhere, the Turkish Government’s 

denial is yet another slap in the face. It is this denial that keeps 

the Armenian genocide a burning issue. Even in our own country, 

a conspiracy of obfuscation and expediency tries to muffle any acknowledgement of the Armenian genocide. Whenever the issue 

threatens to surface in Congress, there is a full court press to try 

to stop it from coming to the floor. 

I would note here that Members of the House, Democrats and 

Republicans, are friends of Turkey. I consider myself a friend of 

Turkey. But friends don’t let friends commit crimes against humanity, genocide, and then act as witting or unwitting accomplices in 

their denial after they have committed it. I recall to you that in 

judging the post-World War I case against the prime movers of this 

genocide, the Turkish president of the court stated, ‘‘perpetration 

of such atrocities is not only incompatible with Ottoman laws and 

the Constitution, but also is contrary to the dictates of our Muslim 

faith.’’

I admire him for saying this. He said this for the good of Turkey 

and his words were patriotic. Today in Turkey those kinds of words 

would get you indicted and perhaps prosecuted and thrown into 

prison. Before he launched the Holocaust, as my friend Mr. Sherman said a moment ago, Adolf Hitler sneered and he said, ‘‘Who 

today remembers the Armenians?’’ I recently visited Srebrenica, 

Mr. Chairman, during the July break and like you and like Members on both sides of the aisle, we are very sorry that there are 

genocides that have occurred in the 20th century, like Rwanda, 

Darfur, which is ongoing, and Srebrenica in Bosnia. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY. I would ask, Mr. Chairman, that 

members vote for this resolution. And we need to tell our friends 

19

in Turkey and Ankara that we speak truth to power. I yield back 

the balance of my time. 

Chairman LANTOS. I am pleased to call on the gentleman from 

New York, Mr. Ackerman. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would first like to 

recognize four people who have joined us today. Two of them are 

from my district, from the Armenian Home in Flushing, New York. 

Perouz Kalousdian. She was born in 1909 in Harport, Turkey, and 

is 98 years old. Onorik Eminian, who was born in 1912 in Izmir, 

Turkey, and is 95. Uretzgaen Shirapi Koyan, who was born in 

Istanbul, Turkey. Askouhy Jallyan-Vassilian, who was born in 

Urfa, Turkey, who is 93 years old and is from Mr. Pallone’s district, 

who is with us today. As their age would indicate, each is an Armenian survivor who has longed to be someplace like this on this day. 

I would ask them just to raise their hands because I won’t ask 

them to stand. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, this is a very agonizing 

issue and it is made as agonizing as it is by your very fair summary of the history and the equities, because there are equities on 

either side that one might choose to vote. And I am sure we have 

all given this a lot of thought and we have come to different conclusions. This has been tough for me. I am a big fan and supporter 

of Turkey. Turkey, as you point out, is a very important ally, plays 

a very important geopolitical role, plays a role in the war against 

terror, is with us at a time that is very, very important and when 

so much is at stake. 

They are possibly the best example, in the world in which they 

live, of the things that we would like to see countries begin to become. And yet there is equity on the other side as well. We have 

indeed been told the timing is bad. In all the years I have been 

here the timing was always bad, and I can’t think of a time when 

the timing is not going to be bad. But the timing was bad for the 

Armenian people in 1915 and nothing is going to change that either. The real question is a word, the word ‘‘genocide.’’ You have 

defined it as the U.N. has defined it, Mr. Chairman, and I suppose 

that is the legal definition that we stand by. I just don’t know how 

much of a people has to be destroyed before that word can really 

be applied. Is there a percentage? If another 1,000 Armenians were 

murdered would it then have been a genocide? Maybe 10,000 more? 

Our friends in Turkey have to understand that they can get beyond this. And I know how emotional an issue this is with them. 

Hard for us to understand, but we try. We have gotten beyond the 

idea that we were fairly genocidal with the Native Americans as 

we chased them across our movie screens. We have to understand, 

and Turkey has to understand as well, that Turkey is no more the 

Ottoman Empire than today’s Germany is the Third Reich. 

We have gotten beyond that with the understanding and admission of things that we have done that are wrong. And we are then 

empowered, freed, and enabled to move on, as others have in the 

world. This is as much a disenabling fact in the history of Turkey 

and before them, the Ottoman Empire, than anything else. And I 

think that the full confronting of this issue by our Turkish friends 

will certainly enable them to move forward. We have heard some 

people say that this would be very damaging to our efforts that are 

underway today. 

20

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. More damaging than anything else, I believe, 

Mr. Chairman, would be the damage done by us denying the truth. 

Thank you. 

Chairman LANTOS. I call on the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. 

Burton. 

Mr. BURTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know we have a lot 

of resolutions that come before this committee. Some are important 

and some are not so important. But we debate those. But I can’t 

remember an issue that is more important than the one we are 

talking about today. In my opinion, stability in the entire Middle 

East could be at risk. There is no question that thousands and 

thousands of people were killed during the time period we are talking about. That was over 90 years ago. And right now there is a 

conflict in Afghanistan, there is a conflict in Iraq, there is a conflict 

that is going off and on in Lebanon and the West Bank. All over 

that area it is a tinderbox. And right next door we have got Iran, 

who is trying to develop a nuclear capability. And our strongest 

ally in the area, the strongest ally in the area, and has been for 

over 50 years, is Turkey. And I just don’t understand why we are 

going to cut our nose off, shoot ourselves in the foot at a time when 

we need this ally. War is hell. War is terrible. And I feel awful 

about these things that happened. I think everybody does. But the 

problem is, why are we doing this at this particular time? I have 

heard the argument on the other side, well, they will bring it up 

again and again. That is all right. They have a right to do that. 

But we are in the middle of two wars right now and the possibility of a nuclear exchange down the road if we aren’t careful, and 

the problems that are going on in Israel and Lebanon. The French 

National Assembly passed a bill criminalizing denial of the Armenian genocide and Turkey severed all bilateral military and defense 

ties with France. What would happen if that happened to us? Seventy-five to eighty percent of the war materials going into Iraq go 

through Turkey, Incirlic, that base. What if they cut us off there? 

How are we going to get supplies into our military? We have got 

thousands—and over 100,000, 130,000 men and women there. And 

yet, we know right now that that is at risk if we pass this resolution. 

Now the Turkish Government and the Armenian Government 

have been pursuing some kind of reconciliation for a long time, and 

right now, including even the possibility of a normalization of relations. The Government of Turkey has made written and verbal offers to set up a commission outside both governments to look into 

the facts of what happened during this period and to come up with 

a resolution of it that is factual, based upon history, not something 

that is an emotional thing that we are dealing with year in and 

year out in this Chamber and in this room. Four-fifths of the 

Turks, 80 percent, have said they would oppose helping the United 

States in Iraq and Afghanistan if this kind of resolution passes. 

The Government of Turkey has already kicked France out. We 

are in the middle of two wars and we have got troops over there 

that are at risk. And we are talking about kicking the one ally that 

is helping us over there in the face right now. It just doesn’t make 

any sense to me. Nine Secretaries of State, the past nine, DemoVerDate Mar 21 2002 14:49 Jan 04, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\FULL\101007M\38188.000 DOUG PsN: DOUG
21

crats and Republicans, have said that this is crazy. Our Secretaries 

of Defense have contacted us, both Democrats and Republicans, 

and said that this is crazy. And it is. I understand the emotionalism; I understand the tragedy that occurred. I feel very bad about 

these ladies who are here today and these gentlemen who are here 

today who lived through part of that. It is regrettable. It is horrible 

that that happened. And I believe this ought to all be put in an 

historical way so that everybody can understand it. And that is 

why I think this commission, with both countries being involved 

and appointing people outside the government to look into the historical facts, should be established, and we should see this come to 

an end. But to come to an end like this right now jeopardizes the 

security of our interests, our interests in the Middle East. 

We get a tremendous amount of our oil from the Middle East. 

And if that area blows up because we don’t handle this right, we 

are going to really rue that day. And it could lead to a war that 

is much, much wider than we have seen so far. This is not the 

time; this is not the way to do this right now. And I hope my colleagues will rethink this before this vote comes up, because it is 

not just this resolution. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman’s—— Mr. BURTON. It is the security of the Middle East that is at 

stake. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman’s time has expired. The gentleman from American Samoa, Mr. Faleomavaega. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Mr. Chairman, I and, no doubt, just about 

every member of this committee has had an opportunity not only 

to review carefully the provisions of House Resolution 106 but to 

listen also to those who advocate passage of the bill and others who 

strongly believe that approval of this legislation will seriously put 

to question our long-standing relationship with the Government of 

Turkey. The issue of the Armenian genocide is not new to this committee, and I want to commend my colleague and former member 

of this committee for his authorship of this bill, the gentleman from 

California, Mr. Schiff, and some 225 of our colleagues who have 

signed on as co-sponsors of this legislation. 

It is my understanding that many of Mr. Schiff’s constituents are 

fellow Americans who are of Armenian ancestry. And I suspect that 

hundreds of thousands of Armenian-Americans who are descendants of some 1.5 million Armenians who were displaced and killed 

during the time when the Ottoman Empire was breaking apart at 

the beginning of the first World War and years after. As you know, 

Mr. Chairman, the Government of Turkey is very much opposed to 

this legislation, as is President Bush and all the top officials of this 

administration. 

I do want to note for the record, Mr. Chairman, that for the past 

60 years our country has not had a better friend and ally than the 

people and leaders of Turkey. In my opinion, Turkey, as a committed member of our NATO Alliance during the Cold War era, 

played a critical and most pivotal role in containing communism 

and limited Soviet influence in this important region of the world. 

Even today, our current efforts to stabilize the crisis in Iraq would 

have been worse had it not been for the assistance that we are getting from Turkey. It is without question that there is tremendous 

22

controversy as to whether there was a genocide committed by officials of the Ottoman Empire against the people of Armenia, and obviously it depends on who you talk to. Some have suggested that 

perhaps some kind of a bilateral or multilateral international commission be established to conduct a comprehensive review of all the 

available documents and data to determine the facts. Others suggest that maybe it be brought before an international tribunal or 

court of justice to review this matter. Some have argued, Why now? 

This is during the time when the Ottoman Empire was breaking 

apart. The Government of Turkey today had nothing to do with 

what happened some 60 or 80 years ago, this is certainly true, but 

our own country is not without blemish. 

We can talk about the treatment of the indigenous Native Americans, the moral issue of slavery, and the civil and voting rights of 

African-Americans; or the mass displacement of some 100,000 Japanese-Americans during World War II; or the illegal or unlawful 

overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii ruled by Queen Liliuokalani. 

I submit, Mr. Chairman, our Government took appropriate action 

to officially apologize to what we did to our fellow Americans who 

happened to be of Japanese ancestry, and even to those who happened to be of Hawaiian ancestry. 

Someone once said, Mr. Chairman, that the greatness of a nation 

is not necessarily measured by its accomplishments, but by its ability to honestly face its mistakes in the past and then take appropriate action to correct them. 

Mr. Chairman, most recently our committee and the House 

passed a resolution asking Japan to officially apologize and recognize the brutal treatment of some 200,000 women from Asia and 

the Pacific, women who were abducted and kidnapped by force into 

sexual slavery by the military forces of the Imperial Army of Japan 

during World War II. It is only fair that we also recognize what 

happened to the 1.5 million Armenians who were systematically 

tortured and killed during the days of the Ottoman Empire. And 

with that, Mr. Chairman, I support this resolution and I respectfully ask my colleagues do the same. 

Chairman LANTOS. Thank you. And before recognizing my next 

colleague, let me state for the record that it is the intention of the 

chair, irrespective of the outcome of the vote on this resolution, at 

the next markup to bring up a resolution of friendship with the Republic of Turkey. I now call on the gentleman from California, Mr. 

Rohrabacher. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want 

to thank you and the ranking Minority member for providing us, 

I would say, a very, very thoughtful look at this issue. And it takes 

that. Every year all of us are barraged by lobbyists, retired Members of Congress, Turkish politicians, and citizen groups about this 

resolution. I always urge the Turks who come to see me, I always 

urge them to apologize. After all, we are talking about huge numbers of civilians who were slaughtered by the Turkish Army, and 

there is no question about that. There is no debate about that fact. 

Huge numbers of civilians were slaughtered. 

I also point out, when people come to talk to me about this issue, 

that the Armenians also were killing civilians at that time. The 

killing of innocents didn’t just happen on the Turkish side. But 

23

there is no doubt that the Turks were in control of the situation 

and that the slaughter of Armenians was overwhelming. The right 

message to both the Turks and the Armenians today is to move on 

and put the past behind you. After all, what we are talking about 

is the Ottoman Empire and not the current Government of Turkey. 

And the current Government of Turkey is not accused of any of the 

crimes that we are discussing today. No one on either side who had 

any responsibility for that crisis and for the crimes that we are 

talking about, no one, not one of them, is alive today. Nevertheless, 

this issue emerges every year. What makes this year different than 

the other times that we faced this resolution? 

This year, this issue that passes before this committee may well 

go to the floor. Also this year, there is something else that I think 

has at least affected my decision-making and that is the audacity 

that some Turks have had during this debate to threaten to cut logistic support for United States troops in Iraq. Isn’t it enough that 

hundreds of our service members may have died due to Turkish refusal to permit the Fourth Infantry Division to transit through 

Turkey and enter Iraq at the beginning of the Iraq conflict? Isn’t 

that enough? Isn’t it enough that year after year, the United States 

raises its voice for Turkey’s application into the EU, much to the 

chagrin of some of our friends in Europe? Year after year, we actively encourage democracy and free elections in that country. 

Year after year we do everything we can to urge the military in 

Turkey to stay out of politics and remain in their barracks. And 

perhaps, you know, perhaps if we have to bend over backwards and 

continually do favors and ignore the truth, well, maybe Turkey 

isn’t ready for EU membership if it demands that we base relationships on denying the truth. Perhaps they are not as good of friends 

of the United States as they profess if they are going to threaten 

to cut off American military troops after they already committed an 

action that cost the lives of our soldiers. The Germans apologized 

to the Jews; the Japanese apologized to the Koreans; the Chinese 

the Filipinos; and of course, the Chinese Communists have never 

apologized to anybody for the slaughter that they have had. Well, 

why on earth should we encourage our friends like Turkey to 

mimic the dictators in Beijing rather than those countries that 

have turned democratic and tried to realize that you build a future 

based on truth? Turkey needs to act responsibly. Both the Armenians and the Turks need to close the chapter in this book. 

I urge my colleagues to support this resolution, to close the chapter, and let’s get on with it and build a better world. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Payne. 

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you 

for calling this very important hearing. And let me say that the 

history and the facts are clear. I don’t think that this question before us today has to do with genocide or not. The people that I hear 

who oppose this resolution are not questioning whether genocide 

occurred, that is clear, and of the 800-year Ottoman Empire and 

the new emergence of what in 1915 was really the Young Turks 

taking over. So it was sort of a cessation of the old Ottoman Empire into the new leadership of Turkey that genocide did occur. I 

don’t think that anyone would deny it. Because even though it was 

in 1948 when the United Nations Convention on the Prevention 

24

and Punishment of Crimes of Genocide defined genocide—genocide 

means that killing of members of a group, causing serious bodily 

or mental harm to members of a group, deliberately inflicting on 

the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical 

destruction in part or whole, imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group, and forcibly transferring children of 

the group to another group—genocide did occur. There is no question about it. As a matter of fact, Adolf Hitler said in 1939—we all 

know that when he ordered his troops into Poland, he said, ‘‘Who, 

after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?’’ Because no one spoke out then. And if we continue to deny that it 

happened, we are denying history. And I think that the question 

has always been, and that is why it has never come up before: Are 

we going to alienate our allies? Well, you know, when the Europeans did not support our preemptive strike in Iraq, you remember 

our Vice President Cheney said, ‘‘Oh, we got old Europe and then 

there is new Europe, and these old Europe, they just don’t see it.’’

Now Europeans were our allies and we separated Europe, and 

Cheney boldly talked about old Europe, and they are behind in 

their thinking, they are archaic. What was wrong about insulting 

our so-called allies of old Europe when now we are worried about 

what Turkey will take as action against us? And 20 countries in 

the world have declared genocide occurred there. Forty States in 

the United States of America have done so. The fact that we are 

more concerned about what Turkey will do—what is going to happen when Turkey attacks the Kurds in Iraq, where we for decades 

protected the Kurds from Saddam Hussein? 

And now what are we going to do, look the other way when Turkey says we will never allow a Kurdistan or the Kurds to be able 

to represent themselves? And so we should not allow our allies—

we have a responsibility, if we are going to be the leaders in this 

world. And we have tarnished ourselves, in my opinion, with preemptive strikes to countries like in Iraq. I think that we should 

stand up on principle. The question is whether genocide occurred 

or not. Ten years from now, if Turkey has turned against us, then 

can it pass? It doesn’t change the facts. The facts are the facts, and 

that is what we should vote on, the facts. I support the resolution. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from California, Mr. Royce. 

Mr. ROYCE. Thank you, Chairman Lantos, and I will be brief in 

my comments. I am a co-sponsor, original co-sponsor of this resolution. It is an issue I have worked on for many, many years. I am 

old enough to have known some of the survivors, while they were 

still alive, of this genocide. And I have worked on this issue since 

I was a State Senator in California. The original resolution that I 

introduced and passed in California a generation ago was this 

genocide resolution. And we have had President Reagan speak out 

about the Armenian genocide. We have had a lot of water under 

the bridge. But I think now it is time for Congress to take action. 

This resolution focuses singularly on the United States’ record of 

the Armenian genocide. As the text indicates, our National Archives are filled with thousands of pages documenting the premeditated extermination of the Armenian people. As the genocide was 

being committed, the U.S. launched a diplomatic effort, a political 

25

and humanitarian campaign worldwide to end the carnage at that 

time. We should be proud of that effort. 

Yet to this day, for a variety of reasons, we fail to recognize the 

events that began 90 years ago for what they are. Genocide is what 

those events were. And we have a chance to set the record straight. 

The U.S. has long been a global leader in promoting human rights 

around the world. We all know this. But on this issue, the issue 

of the Armenian genocide, we lag behind. The French, the Swiss, 

the Swedish, the Germans, even the Russian Governments recognize the Armenian genocide. As a global leader in human rights, 

it is imperative for the United States to stand on principle and recognize the annihilation of the Armenians as genocide. 

Opponents ask, ‘‘Why now?’’ They warn of dire actions that Turkey might take against the United States if this resolution passes. 

But it is important that this committee does not lose sight between 

what is right and wrong and speak out about the wrongs in the 

world. While the Armenian genocide was the first of the 20th century, the blind eye cast to the slaughter of the Armenians was a 

point used by Hitler, who asked his Joint Chiefs of Staff, ‘‘Who 

speaks today of their annihilation?’’

This was a point first made to me by my father, who served with 

Third Army and Seventh Army as they cut through Germany. And 

when they got into Dachau, the concentration camp, he had his 

brother’s camera, and he took photographs there of that genocide, 

of what happened in that genocide, of the human bodies that were 

in the baths and in the ovens and in the rail cars. And to this day 

he still has to use those photographs with those who denied that 

that genocide ever occurred. And as he says, ‘‘History is a continuum that affects today and tomorrow.’’

It is much harder to get tomorrow right if we get yesterday 

wrong. The world’s strength to oppose killing today is made greater 

by accountability for actions present, but also past. And I want you 

to think for a minute about what could easily be said by the culpable leaders of the Khartoum government who continue their 

genocide in Darfur while denying that that is genocide. 

So frankly, it is weakened by denial of accountability and obfuscation of past acts. Not recognizing the Armenian genocide as such 

does just that. For the sake of the genocides past and present, I 

urge the passage of this bipartisan resolution. One and a half million Armenians were murdered. Five hundred thousand were removed from their homeland. Passing this resolution will be a victory for human rights. And I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from Florida, Mr. Wexler. 

Mr. WEXLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I speak in opposition to 

this resolution. I do so with deep reservations given the importance 

of this resolution to Armenian-Americans. Over the past several 

years, I have joined with both the Clinton and Bush administrations in recognizing the tragedy that befell countless Armenians 

under the Ottoman Empire, starting in 1915. No one disputes that 

this was one of the darkest chapters in the last century. However, 

as a Member of Congress who wants to see lasting peace and reconciliation between Armenians and Turks, I strongly believe this 

resolution will further divide these two nations and peoples. 

26

I know it is not the objective of this resolution to create further 

tension between Turks and Armenians, however the impact of its 

passage will surely deepen animosity, cripple efforts of those seeking reconciliation, and will inflame a region of the world already 

under great duress. I urge my colleagues to heed the words of 

Mezrab II, the spiritual leader of the Armenian Orthodox community in Turkey, who recently said that the Armenian genocide resolution pending in the United States Congress disrupts both the relations between Turkish people and Armenians in Turkey, and between Turkey and Armenia. 

Mr. Chairman, passage of this resolution is not in the interest 

of our national security and will damage our long-standing relationship with our NATO ally, Turkey. As Secretaries Rice and 

Gates stated in their letter to Speaker Pelosi in March, the passage 

of this resolution will significantly endanger U.S. national security 

interests in the region. Their letter also calls Turkey an indispensable ally in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Balkans, and states that 

we must recognize the important contributions Turkey is making 

to United States national security as well as security and stability 

in the broader Middle East and Europe. Additionally, eight former 

Secretaries of State and three Secretaries of Defense from the Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, and Ford administrations have all expressed 

their opposition to this resolution in the name of American national 

security interests, and in support of reconciliation efforts between 

Armenians and Turks. 

It is clear that America can ill afford to lose the support of an 

ally as important as Turkey at this critical juncture. As the world’s 

oldest Muslim majority democracy, Turkey is an indispensable 

partner to our troops in Iraq and in Afghanistan. In Iraq, Turkey 

provides American troops access to its air space, military bases, 

ports, as well as its border crossing into Iraq. Turkey is a linchpin 

in the trans-shipment of vital cargo and fuel resources to American 

troops and coalition partners. Incirlic Air Base in Turkey is responsible for 75 percent of American military air cargo going into Iraq. 

Turkey has provided training for Iraqi diplomats, political parties, 

military officers, and security forces, contributes to NATO’s Iraq 

training mission, and is active in reconstruction efforts within Iraq. 

In Afghanistan, Turkey twice commanded the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force. That is our war in Afghanistan. 

Turkey led the forces twice. Turkey also supports a provincial reconstruction team, provides both counternarcotics and military 

training to Afghan security forces, and is active in reconstruction, 

including building and operating several hospitals. In addition to 

Iraq and Afghanistan, Turkish peacekeeping troops serve shoulder 

to shoulder with our men and women in the Balkans. Turkey is essential to American energy security by providing alternative supply 

sources and routes around Russia and Iran. 

Turkey also remains a critical partner of our ally, Israel. Together Turkey and Israel are essential to American security interests in the region and stand as beacons of democracy in a dangerous Middle East. Finally, I urge my colleagues to think carefully, carefully about the impact of this resolution on our Iraq policy. For those Members of Congress who want American troops to 

leave Iraq and come home as soon as possible, as I certainly do, 

27

please think carefully about the impact of this resolution on our 

troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Where will tens of thousands of 

American troops redeploy from when they do finally leave Iraq? 

Mr. Chairman, it is my hope that today’s debate will lead to a 

renewed effort by this committee and Congress to focus on reconciliation between Armenians and Turks that will lead to open 

borders and healthy bilateral relations between Armenia and Turkey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman LANTOS. It gives me special pleasure to call on my 

friend from Missouri for the first time as a returning member of 

this committee, Mr. Blunt. 

Mr. BLUNT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am sorry to be returning to the committee under these circumstances. Jo Ann Davis was 

a great Member of Congress and a great example of courage. I well 

remember the last week I saw her on the House floor. And it was 

clear that this challenge that she was facing was a very difficult 

challenge for her, but she was still here doing the work that she 

was elected to do as long as she could. I am also pleased, Mr. 

Chairman, to return to the committee with you and Ms. RosLehtinen and my many friends on either side of the aisle on this 

committee for the work that the committee does. 

I have been concerned about this resolution, Mr. Chairman, for 

some time. I had no sense until yesterday that I would actually be 

voting on this resolution in the committee. And I respect the comments that have been made on both sides of this. It is clear that 

there is no partisan division in this committee on this issue, but 

clearly there are two strongly held points of view. I would repeat 

the comments that the chairman started the hearing by, by reminding our friends again that eight former Secretaries of State, 

in fact, all of the living Secretaries of State, including Colin Powell 

and Madeleine Albright, have urged us to drop the resolution, saying, ‘‘It would 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.’’ I also, Mr. Chairman, would like to add for the record of the committee just one paragraph from a Washington Post editorial this 

morning titled ‘‘Worse Than Irrelevant.’’ Perhaps I am doing that 

because I so seldom get to quote the Washington Post in a way that 

I agree with. But the last paragraph of that ‘‘Worse Than Irrelevant’’ editorial this morning says, with some reaching out to both 

sides of this argument, I think, as members of this committee are 

today,

‘‘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 United States security 

28

interests, the Armenian genocide resolution cannot be called 

frivolous. In fact, its passage would be dangerous and grossly 

irresponsible.’’

I think, Mr. Chairman, that while there is never a good time to 

address this issue for the reasons that have been mentioned, this 

is a particularly difficult time, again for reasons that other members have brought to the committee. And I will be voting no as my 

first vote on this committee in some time. And I thank you for the 

time. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from New York, Mr. Engel. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Chairman, in many ways, I wish this resolution was not before us today. Turkey has been a long and faithful ally and, from 

our point of view, has acted more than responsibly in Iraq, the 

Middle East, and the world at large. Turkey’s population is overwhelmingly Muslim but Turkey is a secular state, has good relations with Israel, is a democracy and has been a country that the 

United States is proud to call a friend. Indeed, Turkey shows that 

there is another way for majority-Muslim states than radical Muslim fundamentalism. 

On the other hand, Mr. Chairman, it is not to be denied that 

genocide did happen to the Armenian people. It was the Ottoman 

Empire who created this genocide, not Turkey. Turks today are no 

more responsible for the genocide that happened nearly 100 years 

ago than young Germans today are responsible for the Holocaust 

which happened 60 years ago. 

Germany acknowledges the Nazi era and moves on. The United 

States is close friends with Germany. I believe that Turkey should 

acknowledge this and move on, as well. I don’t support reparations 

or land claims or anything that might grow out of this resolution. 

But I do support the fact that genocide is genocide and there is no 

way of sugar-coating it or cleaning it up or pretending it isn’t there. 

People suffered greatly and the best way to move on to the future 

is by acknowledging what happened in the past. 

And so, Mr. Chairman, with a heavy heart, I will vote for this 

resolution today. But I think that sometimes we really need to reconsider, or consider, whether some resolutions that we vote for 

can indeed be counterproductive. 

I yield the remaining time that I have to Mr. Sherman, who has 

asked me for a few minutes of my time. 

Mr. SHERMAN. I thank the gentleman from New York. 

We are asked why we should act now. Turkey will be a better 

ally if we speak truth to Turkey, and Turkey will be an even better 

ally if it speaks truth itself. 

But another reason to act now is very personal. Mr. Ackerman 

introduced us to four survivors. They fled to this country after the 

genocide. This is their last chance to see the country that gave 

them refuge take a stand of truth and to speak truth with valor, 

and that is why we can’t put this off. They are here today and we 

need to show them that this is a country that acts based on morality, based on the truth. 

I yield back. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Tancredo. 

Mr. TANCREDO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

29

Mr. Chairman, when I last voted on this particular resolution a 

couple of years ago, I thought I made it clear—at least I hope I 

did—that that would be the last time I would be voting in favor, 

but in the hopes that our two friends in this dispute would come 

to some resolution of this on their own and that we were not, I believe, doing anything productive in the continued discussion of a 

resolution of this nature. So I am today going to vote no. 

I do not know how deeply we need to look into the dustbin of history to find—or how this—I guarantee you this committee could 

spend all of its time that is allotted doing exactly that, looking into 

the dustbin of history, of every imaginable wrong that has been 

committed by every imaginable, in fact real, empire that has long 

since passed away, whether it is the Ottoman Empire, the Japanese Empire, the Austrian-Hungarian Empire, or indeed the 

Roman Empire. We could go on for a long time condemning the 

atrocities committed under each of these regimes. It is not productive. It is no longer productive to do so today. 

I was one of two to vote against the resolution we had condemning or asking the Japanese to step up to the plate, with regards to the comfort-women situation. Again, it was a different government, a totally different situation. We should, I think, use our 

time more productively. 

I certainly believe that the atrocities have been committed but, 

as was mentioned by Mr. Royce, they are fully documented in our 

archives. There is nothing that this committee can do to make 

them either go away or to sugar-coat them. It only, unfortunately, 

in discussing this resolution, can make the situation worse. So I reluctantly will be voting no on the resolution. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman LANTOS. Thank you very much. 

We have live votes on the floor. The committee will stand in recess and we shall resume immediately upon the conclusion of the 

votes. 

[Recess.] 

Chairman LANTOS. The committee will resume. 

The gentleman from California, Mr. Berman. 

Mr. BERMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

There is no doubt that Turkey is a critical ally of the United 

States in a volatile region. At a time of growing Islamic radicalism, 

it is a moderate Muslim country that provides a model for others. 

But none of this justifies turning a blind eye to the reality of the 

Armenian genocide. I don’t pretend to be a professional historian. 

I haven’t scoured the archives in Ankara looking for original documents. But one thing is clear: The vast majority of experts, people 

who have looked at this issue for years, agree that the tragic 

events of 1914 to 1918 constitute genocide. 

In a recent letter to Members of Congress, the International Association of Genocide Scholars stated the following, and I quote:

‘‘The historical record on the Armenian genocide is unambiguous and documented by overwhelming evidence. It is proven 

by foreign office records of the United States, France, Great 

Britain, Russia and, perhaps most importantly, of Turkey’s 

World War I allies, Germany and Austria-Hungary, as well as 

30

by the records of the Ottoman courts-martial of 1918 to 1920 

and by decades of scholarship.’’

And it goes on to say—this is the International Association of 

Genocide Scholars:

‘‘As crimes of genocide continue to plague the world, Turkey’s 

policy of denying the Armenian genocide gives license to those 

who perpetrate genocide everywhere. We urge you to pass H. 

Res. 106 because it is recognition of a historical turning point 

in the 20th century, the event that inaugurated the era of modern genocide. In spite of its importance, the Armenian genocide 

has gone unrecognized until recently and warrants a symbolic 

act of moral commemoration.’’

Professor Yehuda Bauer, a highly-respected scholar at Hebrew 

University of Jerusalem, has written that ‘‘the Armenian genocide 

is the closest parallel to the Holocaust.’’ In a 1985 report, a submission of the U.N. Commission on Human Rights found that the massacres of Armenians in 1915 and 1916 qualified as genocide. And 

as Raphael Lemkin, a Polish lawyer who coined the word ‘‘genocide’’ and drafted the International Genocide Convention, told an 

interviewer, ‘‘I became interested in genocide because it happened 

to the Armenians.’’

Mr. Chairman, 20 other countries, including France, Canada, 

Russia, Switzerland and Chile, have formally recognized the Armenian genocide. As a world leader in promoting human rights, we 

have a moral responsibility to join them. I urge and I vote for this 

resolution. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Pence. 

Mr. PENCE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And I really come to this markup today after a gut-wrenching 

number of days of reflection and prayer. And I rise in opposition 

to this measure, but I do it with a heavy heart. 

For the victims of the events that began in 1915, 92 years is a 

long time coming. I want to acknowledge with admiration the presence of families affected by the events of the last century, about 

which we debate today. I admire them for their determination. I 

appreciate their prayers that have been rendered on behalf of 

members of this committee charged with public duties in this matter. And I am personally grateful for their testimony of faith and 

devotion to their families and their loved ones. 

Mr. Chairman, let me be clear, there was a genocide committed 

against the Armenians in the period beginning in 1915. It is with 

this belief that I have supported a similar resolution in the past. 

The resolution before us correctly cites President Ronald Reagan’s 

proclamation on the holocaust dated 22 April, 1981, which made 

reference to the ‘‘genocide of the Armenians.’’ There was, indeed, a 

genocide of the Armenians, and it will not be forgotten. 

I do not minimize or deny the horror that took place in the waning days of the Ottoman Empire. The fact that more than 1 million 

Christians were killed en masse makes it all the more poignant to 

me. I do not accept the contention that this was mere collateral 

damage in a bloody war; it was not. We will not forget this genocide, and I will not forget this genocide. 

31

But I cannot support this resolution at this time. The Old Book 

tells us that there is a time for every purpose under Heaven. With 

American troops in harm’s way dependent on critical supply routes 

available through an alliance that we enjoy with the nation of Turkey, I submit that, at this time, this is not the time for this Nation 

to speak on this dark chapter of history. I believe this is a season 

that calls for standing with our troops first, who are in harm’s way. 

This is a season that calls for maintaining relationships with a crucial ally in the global war on terror. 

And Turkey is an indispensable partner to our efforts in Iraq and 

Afghanistan. More than 70 percent of air cargo into Iraq transits 

through Turkey. Thousands of transport sorties have left Turkey. 

The Northern Watch no-fly zones of the original Gulf War ceasefire were begun out of Turkey. Their basing and logistics support 

is simply indispensable to our efforts in the Middle East. And the 

Incirlik Air Base has been a staple of American power projection 

for decades. Our basing lease is renewed annually and it is something we should not, at a time of war, take for granted. 

The question before us today, I submit to you respectfully, Mr. 

Chairman, is simple, and it should be: What is in our national interest and which course best advances our national security? 

At this time in our Nation’s history, we are engaged in a war on 

terror and we are constantly reminded that it requires allies, support at home and abroad. We need every ally in that war. 

And we have heard from every living former Secretary of State 

and Defense that this resolution would be unwise at this time. And 

I am aware of the strong opinions of both the President and the 

Secretary of State on this subject, as well. 

I believe we should proceed with compassion for Americans 

whose families were affected by the genocide of the Armenians last 

century. But I also believe we should proceed with caution. At a 

time that we are at war, we must do that which is in our Nation’s 

interests and the interests of our soldiers downrange. 

And with that, I respectfully and regretfully encourage a no vote 

on this resolution. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. 

Delahunt. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I think it is important. I have heard others state that this House 

has not acted on this issue. The reality is that this House has acted 

on this issue, in 1984, and it is expressed in the ‘‘whereas’’ clauses 

under House Joint Resolution 247. And let me read into the record 

the relevant language:

‘‘The President of the United States is authorized and requested to issue a proclamation calling upon the American people to observe such a day as a day of remembrance for all the 

victims of genocide, especially the 1.5 million people of Armenian ancestry who were victims of a genocide perpetrated in 

Turkey between 1915 and 1928 and in whose memory this date 

is commemorated by all Armenians and their friends throughout the world.’’

So the fact is that there has been an Act of Congress relative to 

this issue. I say that because I think it is important that the record 

32

be clear because some of my colleagues have indicated that it is 

time for this Congress to take action. Well, this body has taken action. 

Having said that, just several points: Nobody can deny the support and the friendship of Turkey and the Turkish people to the 

people of the United States and the American Government. We all 

remember their support for the United States in Korea. Others 

have listed in detail the contributions of Turkey and the Turkish 

people to the United States. That also is a fact. 

I view this particular resolution not directed at the current government in Turkey, nor the Turkish people. As my colleague on my 

left, Congressman Engel, indicated in his remarks that he did not 

assess the culpability and the blame for the Holocaust on the German people who live in Germany today and have made efforts to 

make amends to the Jewish people. I look at this resolution as directed to all of us, all of mankind, if you will, to our darker angels, 

not our better angels. Because as others have indicated, we all 

share, on some level, whether we be Germans, Armenians or 

Turks, all Americans, a responsibility for dark moments in our own 

history. The gentleman from American Samoa related several: The 

internment of the Japanese-Americans in World War II, the stain 

of slavery that is a part of our own history. There is a long list. 

Events in Iraq that have been condemned by the world make us 

responsible. 

Back in the 1980s, American Government actions in Guatemala 

resulted in a report commissioned by the United Nations which implicated the American Government in the genocide that occurred 

against the indigenous people in that country, where some 200,000 

indigenous people were slaughtered and murdered. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

The gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Flake. 

Mr. FLAKE. I thank the chairman. 

I will be very brief. I simply think that it is with much caution 

that we ought to move on matters like these, given the repercussions out there. I want to associate myself with the comments of 

Mr. Pence. I don’t try to minimize what happened, nor do I try to 

wash over it. But simply, where do we go from here? 

And I think the best way is to vote no and hope that the parties 

themselves can reconcile. It is said that, if not now, when? When 

is the right time? I think we might have to concede that the time 

has come and gone for this type of resolution. We simply need to 

move ahead. And I think that that is the best course here. 

I yield back. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from New York, Mr. Meeks. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Like many of my colleagues here today, I have agonized over this 

markup, this hearing today. True, as many have indicated, that 

Turkey is a true and strong ally of the United States. And true, 

given the current political situation across this land, particularly 

with the moderate Islamic nations, we need to make sure that our 

war on terror is not us just condemning and looking at countries 

that happen to be moderate Islamic states. That is all true. 

It is also true that there is no denying that, from 1915 to 1923, 

the ethic Armenians suffered atrocities of the worst kind. I am reVerDate Mar 21 2002 14:49 Jan 04, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\FULL\101007M\38188.000 DOUG PsN: DOUG
33

minded that we should never allow those kinds of atrocities to go 

and to be forgotten. 

And so, to a degree that we talk about the atrocities of the past 

so that we can understand the mistakes of the past and have a better tomorrow, this dialogue is good, and I do believe that it should 

take place in the Parliament in Turkey. 

What I am most concerned with, though, here, is our own House. 

This same resolution came up 3 years ago, and I, at that time, 

voted to support it, not to take sides, but with the hope that it 

would provide forward movement in the reconciliation process, that 

it would help to bring healing to those who suffered. And it hurts 

me now to still see many of the individuals who suffered in front 

of this room. But what hurts me even more is the apparent inaction of this Congress to deal with its own problems and how the 

rest of the world is looking at us. 

And, yes, as many members have mentioned, they have talked 

about our past, particularly atrocities to deal with slavery. And I 

have been a Member of this House for the last 91⁄2 years, and I 

have seen resolutions come up with regards to slavery, just to have 

this Nation apologize, and it has not happened. We cannot do what 

we are asking other individuals to do in our Congress. We have 

failed to do what we are asking other people to do. I was brought 

up to say that you take care of your own house first. In fact, I was 

reminded of a biblical scripture, Matthew 7:5. Basically the modern 

English translation says, ‘‘You hypocrite. First remove the beam 

from your own eye, then you will see clearly to remove the piece 

of sawdust from another believer’s eye.’’ We have not removed the 

beam from our own eye. 

When the Judiciary Committee—and Chairman Conyers, he has 

had a bill for years just to study the effects of slavery and whether 

or not reparations would be appropriate, just to study it. It cannot 

pass this House. In fact, I have seen Members of this House, when 

that bill was proposed, smile and snicker that it is a foolish bill. 

We have to clean up our own house. 

I have a bill coming up, a resolution that I am going to put out 

shortly, working on it now, talking about the atrocities that took 

place to the Native Americans of this land. I have yet to see us 

pass a resolution to talk about them, who we still have abolished 

and put them on their own small little territories called reservations, living in abject poverty. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Barrett. 

Mr. BARRETT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

While I understand the true intent of resolution H. Res. 106, I 

am afraid the consequences of this bill could be extremely great for 

our country if it is reported out of the House Foreign Affairs Committee today. I cannot stress the harm that I believe could come 

to our national security interests in the region and to our troops 

in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

Turkey is a crucial partner in United States efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the entire Middle Eastern region as a whole. Passage of the resolution could have significant negative effects on 

34

Turkish-American relationships. The use of Turkish airspace, military bases and border crossings could be jeopardized. With about 

3,000 trucks passing into Iraq every day from Turkey and a large 

percentage of our logistics in Iraq coming from the nation, this 

would be absolutely disastrous for our troops and coalition forces 

bravely serving in Iraq. 

Furthermore, Turkey has continued to be a key collaborator in 

United States efforts to promote stability in the Middle East, the 

Balkans and Afghanistan, all of which have significant strategic 

importance to the United States. In Afghanistan alone, Turkey has 

twice commanded the NATO-led International Security Assistance 

Force and is currently supporting the provincial reconstruction and 

military training of Afghan security forces. 

I believe the issue at hand today is best left to the Turkish and 

Armenian people to work through together. And I am extremely 

hopeful that the two countries can continue to move forward toward reconciliation and an opening of the Turkish-Armenian border. 

With that, Mr. Chairman, I must respectfully oppose H. Res. 106. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentlelady from California, Ms. Watson. 

Ms. WATSON. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for your leadership. And I want to thank Mr. Schiff for introducing H. Res. 106. 

Mr. Chairman, the current administration has launched a massive lobbying effort against H. Res. 106. I find it incredible that not 

only the administration but the Government of Turkey has given 

so much attention to a nonbinding sense-of-the-Congress resolution 

about a horrific incident of Armenian genocide whose factual documentation is beyond dispute. The Turkish Government argues that 

congressional recognition of genocide will somehow adversely affect 

our two countries’ bilateral relations, in what I believe is yet another misguided effort to silence recognition of Armenian genocide 

of 1915 to 1921. 

The debate here today, in some ways, reminds me of the debate 

that took place in this same committee room not long ago on the 

comfort women. Similar arguments were used by the opposition to 

attempt to thwart the comfort-women resolution. Again, the historical facts of the matter were beyond dispute. Again, a government 

was in denial. And, again, a trusted ally of the U.S. vociferously 

argued that the pending nonbinding legislation would undermine 

bilateral relations. It hasn’t. I don’t see how speaking to truth can 

ever undermine relations with our allies. 

H. Res. 106 is not directed against Turkey. Read the bill. It talks 

about the Ottoman Empire on Turkish soil. Instead, H. Res. 106 

targets denial and, most importantly, it targets modern-day apologists and perpetrators of genocide and other grave crimes against 

humanity. 

Opponents of H. Res. 106 argue that the resolution, if passed, 

would upset our ally, Turkey, causing it to retaliate against United 

States interests. Turkey, itself, at various levels and channels, has 

suggested so much. I believe, however, that Turkey would not be 

acting in its best interests if it was to opt for retaliation, particularly given the fact that 11 other members of NATO, including 

Canada, have recognized the Armenian genocide. Turkey is a close 

and trusted NATO ally, and that is beyond dispute. Its alliance 

35

with NATO is based on shared interests and values. Turkey is also 

one of the largest recipients of United States security assistance. 

And as a valued and trusted partner of NATO and the U.S., I believe that the diplomatic fallout from passage of this bill is overblown and does not speak to the broad and deep relationship between our two great nations. 

The promotion of human rights as a unique and critical part of 

the U.S. foreign policy is one factor that I believe sets our Nation 

apart from many others around the world. If we are to uphold 

these values and if they are to have credibility among both friend 

and foe, then we cannot be bullied into silence here today. And I 

would urge my colleagues to vote yes on H. Res. 106. 

And I yield back my time, if I have any left, to Mr. Brad Sherman. 

He is not here. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from Nebraska, Mr. Fortenberry. 

Mr. FORTENBERRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this 

markup today. Much has been said, and I will be brief. 

After giving this matter careful consideration, I remain concerned that this resolution is not the appropriate instrument for 

fostering reconciliation between the peoples of Armenia and Turkey 

and could potentially cause unintended consequences. 

But it must be said that, without diminishing a horrible chapter 

in history and one of the greatest humanitarian tragedies of the 

past century, I must conclude with reservation that this particular 

approach at this time to addressing some deep wounds of the past 

could jeopardize future opportunities to achieve genuine hope and 

healing. 

I yield back. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Carnahan. 

Mr. CARNAHAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

H. Res. 106 is a nonbinding sense-of-Congress resolution that 

calls on the President to ensure that the foreign policy of the 

United States reflects appropriate understanding and sensitivity of 

human rights, ethnic cleansing, and genocide related to the Armenian genocide. 

U.S. presidents have been and continue to take that into account 

in our foreign policy. President Clinton, in one of his addresses, remembered a great tragedy of the 20th century, the deportations 

and massacres of roughly 1.5 million Armenians in the final years 

of the Ottoman Empire. He further referenced in 1999:

‘‘Today, against the background of events in Kosovo, all Americans should recommit themselves to building a world where 

such events never occur again. As we learn from the past, we 

also build for the future.’’

Armenians are right to seek continued remembrance of unimaginable atrocities under the Ottoman Empire. The history is clear. 

Modern-day Turkey is wrong to be slow to acknowledge and quick 

to minimize or even criminalize discussion of historic facts. 

We must look at this in the context of U.S. foreign policy in our 

country’s interest. I believe we must pursue reconciliation between 

Turks and Armenians, stability and peace in the Middle East, proVerDate Mar 21 2002 14:49 Jan 04, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\FULL\101007M\38188.000 DOUG PsN: DOUG
36

moting a rare secular democracy in the Muslim world. On balance, 

this resolution, at this time, is not the best course. 

We saw stunning clarity of message recounted in the Washington 

Post editorial of today with all eight former Secretaries of State, 

from Kissinger to Madeleine Albright, urging the Congress to drop 

the resolution, saying:

‘‘It could endanger our national security interests in the region, 

our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and damage our efforts to 

promote reconciliation between Armenia and Turkey.’’

In a visit to Turkey last summer, I saw many speaking about 

Turkey’s aspirations to be a member of the EU. Turkey will have 

to step up and face its history with the Armenians, with Cyprus, 

with tolerance to religious minorities, in the course of that. 

Turkey is a long-time and strong ally in a tough neighborhood, 

in an area where there are few examples in the Muslim world of 

a secular, democratic friend. In the context of today, in today’s U.S. 

interest, reluctantly I must vote no. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Inglis. 

Mr. INGLIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

This is a very difficult vote today and a difficult decision but I 

think it is best to vote no. And here is why. 

To our Armenian friends, we understand your desire for justice 

and vindication, which you see closely tied up in this resolution. On 

the plain reading of the text, it would be very difficult for any of 

us to vote against this resolution. But we also understand that passage of this resolution may have the exact opposite outcome of 

what Armenians actually desire. 

If you desire Turkey to have a frank admission of the past, 

maybe teaching Armenian perspective in schools and having reconciliation with your country and your people throughout the 

world, passing this resolution through the committee and on the 

floor of the House may make all of those things more difficult rather than less difficult. 

That is why I must reluctantly vote no. And I suspect there are 

many members of this committee who feel that way, and they are 

certainly not genocide-deniers. 

It seems to me that when we come upon a current situation of 

genocide, say, in Darfur, for example, it is incumbent upon us, as 

those with leadership in the United States, to speak out against 

those examples or those incidents of genocide. When it comes to a 

historical matter, it is a little bit different in that if there is a historical matter that needs attention—and there have been ones before this committee recently that were discussed earlier—it is 

worth voting to express the sentiments of the United States, the 

House, and the Senate on those topics. But where those sentiments 

begin to affect current populations is where we have to take special 

care. 

And my concern is certainly with our supply lines, which has 

been well-discussed here already. But it is also with the Armenians 

who must face the current consequences of this kind of action. And 

for them, I think we should have some concern about whether this 

would actually make it worse for them. 

37

And so, for that reason, Mr. Chairman, I intend to vote no. And 

I appreciate the opportunity to explain that vote. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentlelady from California, Ms. Woolsey. 

Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for the 

time. 

I am proud to be a co-sponsor of this legislation, and I urge all 

of my colleagues to support it. 

As part of the debate, I thought what I would do is use my time 

to highlight two women from our area, Mr. Chairman, from the 

San Francisco Bay area, and tell about their real-life experiences 

during the Armenian genocide. 

The first woman I would like to talk about is Haiganoush 

Marcarian, and she is seen here in this photo. She was born on 

January 24, 1902. Look at her; she is still living. She was in the 

historic Armenian city of Kharpert, Turkey, which suffered a huge 

loss and many losses during the Armenian genocide. When the 

Turks came after her father and brother, both went into hiding, 

her brother in the hills, her father in the well at their home until 

he was actually forced to look elsewhere for his safety. Her mother 

somehow saved the family from the rampant deportations and massacres and, in fact, reunited with her husband for a very brief period. Her husband died, however, as a result of the damp conditions in the wells that he had hidden in for such a long period of 

time. 

In 1923, the remainder of the family was able to make their way 

to Syria and eventually the United States. Ms. Marcarian now resides in Oakland. And at the age of 105, she says she prays she 

will live to see the day when both the Government of Turkey, from 

where she fled, and the Government of the United States, where 

she found refuge, will officially recognize the Armenian genocide. 

The second woman I would like to honor and talk about today 

is Nuvart Karagozian, seen in this picture. She was born in Turkey 

in 1907, when her parents got word of approaching Turkish forces 

and the terrible atrocities they were committing. They put Nuvart 

and her four siblings in an orphanage, believing they would be 

safer there. 

During the ensuing years, Nuvart’s older sister was killed, as 

was their mother, and when Nuvart’s sister was forced to leave the 

orphanage, her baby brother disappeared. Her two older brothers 

were taken by a Turkish family, from which one escaped and reunited later with Nuvart. 

In 1920, Nuvart and her brother Melcon, the little one, were able 

to join an aunt and uncle in Massachusetts and later moved to 

Fresno, California, to establish a farm. In 1971, their long-lost remaining brother sought them out and the three siblings were reunited after 56 years. 

Having been orphaned as a child, Nuvart later spent much of her 

time in Fresno, raising money for Armenian orphans. She celebrates her 100th birthday this October 25th. 

These, Mr. Chairman, are just two examples of survivors. We 

may never know the story of those who were the victims of the 

genocide, so today this committee and the House must speak on 

their behalf. 

I yield back. 

38

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Poe. 

Mr. POE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

It is obvious that the Armenian community wants this passed; 

the Turkish community does not. It is in the best interest of Armenia that it is passed; the best interest of Turkey that it is not 

passed. But passage of this will not settle the issue any more than 

it settled the issue with all of the other nations that have passed 

a very similar resolution, because the argument continues to go on. 

Eventually, maybe in our lifetime, maybe not, Armenia and Turkey have to resolve this issue together. And I think that the passage of this resolution will actually cause more tension than less 

tension because both sides would be more adamant in their positions and stick their heels in the ground. 

The question I have is: What is best for the United States? I 

think that is probably an appropriate decision to be made on this 

issue. What is best for American interests and America, especially 

in the Middle East? So my vote is not what is best for Armenia or 

even what is best for Turkey. My vote is going to be what is best 

for American interests, American national security interests, what 

is best for our troops that are in Iraq in a war and in Afghanistan 

in a war. And I think best for American interest is a vote of no on 

this. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentlelady from Texas, Sheila Jackson 

Lee. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. First of all, Mr. Chairman, let me offer my appreciation to this committee and to you and the ranking member, 

Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, because I think this committee is one of the 

clear examples of opportunities for us to work together. 

And in foreign policy, we often try to overcome partisanship and 

speak to the issues that are important to the United States of 

America. And I think we are doing that here today. And, frankly, 

I think that we are doing that in a manner that is in conjunction, 

that is aligned with the mindset and the principles of this Nation; 

that is, we are all created equal. 

And I will say that I am greatly impressed with the Ambassador 

from Turkey and many of his supporters who have worked in these 

waning hours on the beliefs that they have. I am equally moved, 

and more moved, by those from the Armenian community who have 

toiled year after year to educate this Nation on the important issue 

of which they want addressed. 

In Texas, someone who is in the middle of the road is usually 

called a dead armadillo because that is likely what happens to you 

when you try to broach a compromise. 

I have an amendment that I was putting at the desk and I hope 

my good friends from Turkey will read it. I will not offer it at this 

time because I really want to speak to this legislation. The amendment reinforces some of the language that was in earlier initiatives 

that indicated that Turkey is an ally and a strong friend of the 

United States. 

But I have read this legislation, H. Res. 106, and I would commend you to reading it because the legislation resolve points directly back to the United States, and it reinforces these pages and 

pages of Presidential messages that acknowledge the tragedy of the 

39

Armenian people. We have been on record to acknowledge that. 

The legislation itself points as far back to Ambassador Morgenthau, who wrote to the United States Department of State that the 

policy of the Government of the Ottoman Empire described it as a 

campaign of race extermination on July 16, 1915. The legislation 

also refers us, in 1948, United Nations War Crimes Commission invoked the Armenian genocide—precisely one of the types of acts 

which the modern term ‘‘crimes against humanity’’ is intended to 

cover. There is a chronicling of the history that says that the world 

should simply acknowledge what has happened. 

I hope my friends in Turkey will realize that engagement is important, not last-minute shuffling and pushing, but engagement, 

ongoing establishment of relationships. And all of those who have 

traveled to Turkey have indicated it is a beautiful, wonderful country, wonderful people. And those who are here from Turkey who 

are Americans, likewise, are great contributors. 

But I would simply say that this legislation is balanced and fair. 

And if you read it, it simply calls upon the President to ensure that 

the foreign policy of the United States reflects appropriate understanding and sensitivity concerning issues related to human rights, 

ethnic cleansing, genocide documented in the United States record 

relating to the Armenian genocide and the consequences of the failure to realize a just resolution. 

I respect the work of this administration and past administrations. In fact, I am holding in my hand a letter signed by 10 or so, 

or 8 Secretaries of State. I respect what they are saying. But I 

don’t know if they have read this current legislation. This is not 

in any way an indictment that should impair the relationship between the United States and Turkey. It should be a celebration. 

And maybe as we move to the floor, we might be able to look to 

that commission that has been advocated, where everybody opens 

their historic books. We all sit around the table of reconciliation 

and we document it in a concrete way—Turkey, the Armenian people. 

For those of us who have abhorred Rwanda and Sudan cannot 

find it in our heart to ignore the Armenian people. And I am saddened that it has come to the point that Turkey would feel that 

this is an indictment against the friendship that we have had. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentlelady’s time has expired. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I ask my colleagues to support the underlying 

amendment. 

And I thank my distinguished chairman for yielding to me. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from Florida, Mr. Bilirakis. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Today I urge this committee to pass House Resolution 106 and 

recognize the horrific tragedy of genocide carried out against the 

Armenian people by the Ottoman Empire. 

The more than 1.5 million innocent Armenian men, women and 

children who died should not be brushed aside by history or this 

Congress any longer. It is without question that Turkey is a strategic ally to the United States that has worked to bring peace and 

stability to the Middle East and surrounding region. It is also proven as a crucial partner in the global war on terror. 

40

To be clear to my colleagues who oppose House Resolution 106, 

this measure does not condemn the existing government or Prime 

Minister Erdogan or accuse it of complicity in the genocide. A stable, secular and democratic Turkey has long been the foreign policy 

goals of the United States Government and it will continue to be 

long after this resolution has passed before us. 

The reality is that the Armenian genocide must not be put on the 

back-burner of history for fear of acknowledging the truth or offending our ally, Turkey. This resolution simply, once and for all, 

seeks to characterize the deliberate extermination of 1.5 million Armenians as genocide. 

For the sake of commemorating every instance of genocide so as 

to prevent its recurrence, let us adopt this resolution today and 

urge its prompt and final passage. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Appreciate it. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from Texas, Mr. Hinojosa. 

Mr. HINOJOSA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman Lantos and Ranking 

Member Ros-Lehtinen. I appreciate the opportunity to debate this 

resolution, H. Res. 106, and applaud your leadership in bringing 

this legislation before our committee today. 

This resolution has drawn considerable attention from a wide 

range of interests—Armenian, Turkish and American. And it demonstrates the passion and emotion that springs from remembrances 

of the past. 

I want to associate with the remarks of my friend and colleague, 

Congressman Meeks from New York. He makes a strong case for 

our Congress to acknowledge the wrong-doings to those who were 

held as slaves. While the twilight of the Ottoman Empire remains 

within the realm of genuine historical debate, the horrors that befell Armenian and Turkish civilians alike were undeniably violent 

and merciless. 

While the academic community will undoubtedly continue their 

debate on the events of the First World War, it is important that 

we memorialize the victims of this violence in honest terms that 

neither antagonize nor trivialize. We must emphasize that the 

markup of H. Res. 106 and our consideration of this resolution is 

absolutely not an indictment against the modern nation of Turkey. 

As our Nation has turned its attention toward the Muslim world, 

our alliance with Turkey has benefited our mutual goals of 

thinning terrorism and building a stable Middle East. This resolution should not be interpreted by the Turkish people as a break in 

our nations’ close alliance. As our committee investigates the actions of a long-fallen empire, I wish to emphasize our Nation’s continuing respect and admiration for the Turkish people and its government. 

After full consideration of the consequences of this legislation, I 

must vote no. As committee members vote on this resolution today, 

it is important that we honor the contributions of our loyal allies 

and hope for a future of reconciliation and understanding by the 

Turkish and the Armenian people. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from New York, Mr. Crowley. 

Mr. CROWLEY. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for bringing this resolution forward. 

41

Let me state from the outset that I do recognize that our friends 

in Turkey are our allies, that there are many Turkish Americans 

who are great Americans and contributing mightily to our country 

today. And we recognize that. And I also recognize that this resolution is not aimed at modern Turkey. This resolution is aimed at 

what was once the Ottoman Empire and what they did in terms 

of what I believe was genocide to the Armenian people. 

As was mentioned before, to destroy in whole or in part a national ethnic, racial or religious group, as such, killing members of 

a group, is within the definition of the confines of the genocide resolution of the United Nations. I believe that this particular case 

suggests that this was a case of genocide. 

As with haste to my good friend from New York, Mr. Meeks, and 

his comments, which I believe are very powerful—and I know that 

he believes very strongly in the position as it pertains to slavery 

and as it pertains to the Native American situation—let me say 

that if those bills were before this committee, if we had jurisdiction, 

they were brought forward, I would vote for both resolutions to recognize the wrong-doings of slavery by this country as well as how 

we treated the Native American population. So I feel somewhat 

freer in terms of expressing that. I do believe that there were elements of genocide in both situations. 

But that doesn’t distract me from taking away from the point 

that is at hand. When is there ever a good time to do a resolution 

like this? Probably never is there ever a good time to do any of 

these types of things. There is always some inconvenience that will 

come up that will say that we ought not take this up at this point, 

we should put it to another time for another vote. 

My mother had a great expression growing up; I think you all 

know it: ‘‘Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will 

never hurt me.’’ In this case, bombs and guns may kill our sons, 

but resolutions will not hurt our country. 

If we are to believe that there are threats that if we do this resolution, that somehow this will hurt our relationship with our ally 

and friend, Turkey; that somehow the unstable position that we 

sustain ourselves in in Iraq today will become more unstable because of this resolution, well, then shame on those who would suggest that. Shame on anyone who would try to use the lives of our 

young men and women in the position they all face themselves in, 

in Iraq today or anyone else in this world, because of this resolution that we are putting forward today. 

We are trying to find the truth as to what happened during that 

time. It is about the Congress recognizing what happened during 

that time, not about anyone else. It is about the House of Representatives taking this position. 

And I have supported this resolution in the past. I have supported this resolution prior to coming to Congress. I think it is the 

right thing to do and now is the right time to do that. I will support this resolution. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman LANTOS. Before recognizing my next colleague, I want 

to ask staff on both sides to alert all members that within a few 

minutes I anticipate having a rollcall vote. 

The gentleman from Oregon, Mr. Wu. 

42

Mr. WU. Mr. Chairman, at this point in our discussion, I think 

that my vote will speak more eloquently than most anything I say. 

I just want to borrow one phrase from a small school in California, 

the California Institute of Technology, better known as Cal Tech. 

Its motto is, The truth shall make you free. The truth shall make 

you free. 

It has deeper textual roots, but I think it is the reason why we 

passed the comfort women bill. It was something that helped free 

the comfort women of the devils that had bedeviled them since 

World War II, is something that will make Japan a better country 

in the future, and it is something that freely states what we in the 

United States Congress see as truth. 

Japan is a good friend and a good ally. Turkey is a friend and 

an ally. And I think that we should act today on the truth in order 

that those who suffered, and their family members, can move on, 

that Turkey can face its past. And if we in this Chamber, so well 

protected and, in fact, selected to come here to speak the truth, are 

concerned about doing that for passing factors, then I think the 

truth will have a hard time, anytime, anywhere in the world. 

Search your hearts, search your souls. I, for one, intend to support 

the resolution. And I believe that the gentleman from California——

Mr. SHERMAN. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I have many 

pithy insights I am dying to share with the committee, the most 

significant of which is we ought to vote before they call a vote on 

the floor of the House. And I will restrain myself, yield back, and 

hope I inspire others. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Miller. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Usually at this stage in 

the debate I would think that everything that could be said has 

been said. But my view is somewhat different. I think the burden 

of the sins of human history are intolerable for all of us. What happened in Germany is intolerable, what happened in Turkey and Armenia—or the Ottoman Empire and Armenia is intolerable. 

I dearly wish that if this Congress passes this resolution, that 

modern-day Turkey would feel chastened, would pause, would examine what happened, would decide if there was something they 

needed to do to acknowledge and bewail their manifold sins and 

wickedness, to do something about it. I fear instead—or I feel certain instead, that there would be none of that; there would simply 

be a sense of being insulted, there would be anger, not any sense 

of being chastened. 

Our standing in the Muslim world does not put us in a position 

to scold, to chasten, even for the most horrific acts of 90 years ago. 

Turkey remains a nation whose friendship we need, is perhaps the 

only stable democracy, enduring democracy in the Muslim world. It 

is a secular country. It needs to be a nation that is leading that 

part of the world toward a very different future, like the future 

that Turkey embraced shortly after these events, beginning with 

Ataturk and forward. And I do not think that there is anything 

that this resolution would accomplish that would push us, push 

Turkey in that direction. 

43

I do grieve for the victims of those horrific events. I understand 

the healing power of acknowledging sins from the past. I remember 

having dinner, as a brand-new Member of Congress, an informal 

dinner with Bob and Doris Matsui. And they told the story that 

they intended to be just a story about how you get things done in 

Congress as a freshman, of persuading other Members to pass a 

resolution acknowledging and apologizing for the internment of 

Japanese in the Second World War. Both Bob and Doris Matsui 

were interned in the Second World War as children. I don’t think 

they had any idea the emotional effect it would have upon them 

to tell the story. And they both broke into tears in telling the story. 

I understand the healing power of acknowledging past sins. 

These are not our sins to acknowledge. I hope the time will come 

for Turkey that they will look honestly, with clear eyes at what has 

happened; they will search their soul; they will try to do what is 

right. 

Mr. Meeks, I will join you in any efforts to search our souls as 

well, to acknowledge and bewail our manifold sins and wickedness. 

But with great misgivings, I will vote against this resolution today. 

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Scott. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. We arrive at 

a very, very difficult and challenging moment. We have three actors here on this stage: Turkey, Armenia, and the United States. 

I can’t begin to tell you how my heart bleeds for the pain, the 

anguish that the people of Armenia have suffered and are suffering. But I believe that we have to look at the here and the now. 

Many of my colleagues have talked about the situation in Japan 

and have talked about the kept women. And yes, there was an 

apology made, and rightfully so. But ladies and gentlemen, we 

were not at war in the Asian Pacific. 

We are at war, whether we like it or we don’t. I happen to don’t 

like it. I wish we weren’t at war. We find ourselves in a very particular position. And I know some of my colleagues have said very 

eloquently, ‘‘Well, we did that to Japan, they didn’t do anything. 

Let us call the Turks’ bluff on this.’’

The question we have got to ask with this vote is: Are we willing 

to put our soldiers, our brave men and women, at risk in this region? Are we willing to take that gamble to say, ‘‘Oh, they are not 

going to do anything,’’ when they clearly have stated that they 

will? 

Now, I said Turkey has a role in this. I belong to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. We just flew back yesterday from our fall 

meetings in Iceland. On the table was the issue of the missile defense system we are trying to put in the Czech Republic and in Poland. We had a vote on the resolution. The Russians, of course, 

were adamantly opposed to this. We didn’t know where the debate 

would go. But critical to the debate was the fact that of all of them 

there, it was the delegation from Turkey that offered us some help, 

and we prevailed. 

Now, what I am saying is, do we want to take a risk that the 

Turks will not remove and pull back over air rights that they have 

given us to fly our fighters into Iraq and Afghanistan? What will 

we say if they say, ‘‘We told you so, so we are not going to let you 

44

use supply lines coming out of Turkey to feed and fuel your troops 

in Afghanistan and in Iraq?’’ What will we say concerning the pipeline that is helping us to 

bring oil around in a less volatile region, skirting around Russia, 

to help with our oil dependency on the Middle East? 

All I am saying, ladies and gentlemen, as we face this very difficult issue, when we measure our allies—and these are allies, 

proven allies—one of the most valuable commodities that they provide is intelligence. Our most reliable source of unfettered intelligence that is helping us in the Middle East comes through Turkey. 

The Armenian question is plain as day. What was done to them 

was wrong. The issue is, what is in the best interests of the national security of the United States? And in the final analysis, the 

folks in this country who voted to send Members of Congress up 

here are citizens of the United States of America. And oftentimes 

in cases like these tough decisions, when right is right on both 

sides—— Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman’s time has expired. The gentleman from California, Mr. Costa. 

Mr. COSTA. Thank you very much, Chairman Lantos, for bringing 

this important resolution before the Foreign Affairs Committee, 

and the ranking member. You all demonstrate, I believe, profiles 

in courage, as our Chairman and our Speaker are demonstrating 

today, that this measure should be heard and debated in the House 

of Representatives. 

Clearly, the debate has demonstrated that there are great differences of opinion on both sides of the aisle. The importance of 

Turkey as an ally to the United States, both as a supporter of the 

war on terrorism, as well as on our efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq, 

obviously have been well stated and not taken for granted. I certainly don’t. But I do support this resolution. 

Much has been said about the potential impacts of our national 

security and the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. But I 

would heed my colleagues who have that concern to note that, in 

fact, when Russia recognized the genocide in 1995, their trade increased with Turkey by over 351 percent. When Greece recognized 

the genocide—who have had tensions over the decades with Turkey—in 1996, their trade increased by 266 percent. And yes, the 

European Union Parliament passed last year a set of conditions, 

economic conditions and social conditions, prior to the entry of Turkey into the European Union. And one of those conditions was the 

recognition of the genocide. And yes, Turkey still is attempting to 

enter into the European Union. Nation states ultimately at the end 

of the day, notwithstanding their own internal politics, do what is 

in their best interests. 

And because of the assistance and because of all the important 

relationships that we have with Turkey, I believe if in fact we pass 

this measure that they will not like it, but they certainly will do 

what is in their best interests. And I believe at the end of the day, 

that will be to continue to have a relationship with our great Nation. 

For me, as I suspect for others in this committee, this resolution 

involves the issue, the simple issue of man’s injustice to mankind. 

45

It has occurred in Rwanda, Cambodia, Bosnia, the Holocaust, and 

in this instance, this resolution is about the Armenian genocide. In 

May 2006 I went on a codel to Iraq and Turkey and Greece with 

my colleague, Mr. Pence. As we traveled through Turkey, we had 

a meeting with the President, Abdullah Gul, who was then the Foreign Minister. He is President today. 

But I would like to relay the story to the members of this committee. I talked about the positive relationship with Turkey and 

America and our longstanding relations, that modern-day Turkey 

stands for successful secular democracy, a responsible nation state 

on the world stage. But I also told them that nations in the world 

have periods of history they would soon forget. I explained that 

slavery in early America is one of the chapters that many of us 

would soon overlook, and even some of our beloved Founding Fathers held slaves. Slavery created turmoil in our Nation for decades 

and was one of the many causes of the Civil War. 

The issues of civil rights in America continued for 100 years following that and resulted in the Civil Rights Act, passed by the 

Congress in the 1960s. And despite this monumental legislation, 

we still have problems today in our country, but we acknowledge 

and we confront them, just as modern-day Turkey should. 

The purpose of this resolution today, then, is not to belittle the 

accomplishments of Turkey, but rather to acknowledge an event 

that occurred early in the 20th century involving a plan to remove 

people from their homes and their lands. And, sadly, it evolved in 

into one of the first genocides of the modern world. Modern-day 

Turkey was not responsible for that genocide but they should acknowledge it and they should move on. 

It is important that we acknowledge this fact in an effort to heal 

the wounds, to build new relationships among Turkey and Armenia 

and the world communities. 

One can debate specific incidences, but growing up in Fresno, 

California, the land of William Saroyan, I can tell you I heard 

many stories as a kid from grandparents of my friends, the 

Kazarians, the Kalijians, the Abrahamian families, about being 

forced to leave their homes; the stories of long marches, the massacres and murders that occurred to women and children. Clearly, 

they believed there was a systematic approach to eliminate the Armenian communities in places that had been their homes and 

farms for centuries. My Armenian friends believed 1915 through 

1923 was a systematic approach, among the first genocides of the 

20th century, and so do I. 

This resolution is not meant to reopen the wounds or degenerate 

the importance of our relationship with the Turkish people or their 

government, and an important ally. But my vote in favor of this 

resolution is to accurately reflect——

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. COSTA [continuing]. The importance——

Chairman LANTOS. The gentleman from New Jersey—— Mr. COSTA [continuing]. Of this and I support the measure. 

Chairman LANTOS [continuing]. Mr. Sires. 

Mr. SIRES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to congratulate 

Congressman Schiff on this resolution. I am truly amazed that a 

resolution that is not directed at modern Turkey should garnish 

46

such attention. And you wonder, something that happened 90 years 

ago, why all of a sudden there is so much attention to this resolution that is not even binding. 

The genocide happened. Over 2 million people. Why not admit it, 

move on? Every country has had their dark periods. Most countries 

have acknowledged them. Somebody has got to speak for these people that I see in front of me, these women that are over 90 years 

old. They have a history. I wish I could talk to them so they could 

tell me what they went through. Why not acknowledge it and move 

on? 

And I certainly appreciate the relationship that we have with 

Turkey. But I feel pressure, I feel like I have a Turkish sword over 

my head somehow if I vote the wrong way here. And I don’t like 

that feeling. Because the relationship between Turkey and the 

United States is as important as the relationship with Turkey with 

the United States. 

I am in support of this resolution. I think it is important that 

history record—so maybe it doesn’t happen again, just like the Holocaust, to make sure it doesn’t happen again. So I am in support 

of this resolution, and I yield the rest of my time to my friend from 

New York, Congressman Ackerman. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. I thank the gentleman, my good friend from New 

Jersey. 

One of our colleagues cited that there were three actors in this 

play: Us, the Armenians, and the Turks. I would say and remind 

us that truth, too, is on the stage. Do not banish truth from this 

stage. Several of our colleagues cited Scripture. I am not one who 

usually does that in public. But in response to the citation that 

there is a time for everything and everything in its season, truth 

is never out of season. It is always the season for truth. 

And for those who claim that the time to do this is wrong, I 

would ask you to look at the four young ladies sitting here in 

wheelchairs, who had help getting up this morning and getting into 

those chairs and onto planes and coming down here after living almost 100 years of peace, and tell them when to come back to this 

room for justice. What time can they come back? 

Please think of the consequences, the full consequences of what 

we do, the damage that we would do to history as you cast your 

votes today. This is not the time to study. It was laughable when 

Ahmadinejad said at Columbia University, ‘‘Well, maybe we should 

have scholars study this.’’ The only thing that does is put it off to 

a future day when the timing would be bad as well. Please do your 

duty to honor justice, honor the truth, recognize history. There is 

no wrong time to do that. 

Thank the gentleman for his time, and yield back. 

Chairman LANTOS. I want to thank all of my colleagues for—Mr. 

Klein, you would like to be recognized? Please. 

Mr. KLEIN. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. 

We have had a tremendous discussion and debate and expressions of why people are going to vote the way they are going to vote 

today, and I will just share mine for just a minute or 2. I think 

many of us in this room are students of history. We studied history. Many people in this room lived the history that we are discussing in this resolution today. But my experience has been 

47

through the study of the Holocaust, and in Florida, where I was a 

State legislator, I worked with many of the people in the community, including a number of Armenian residents of our area, to require teaching the Holocaust in our public schools. And it wasn’t 

so much as teaching the Holocaust, but teaching of what happens 

when man’s inhumanity is allowed to fester over a period of time. 

And the result was the Holocaust and other genocides that have occurred before and after. 

And I think the reason that I believe it is important that this 

historical event is acknowledged and understood is what the survivors of the Holocaust use as their two-word phrase: Never again. 

Never again. 

And I know the people that survived the Armenian genocide, the 

families, and other situations since that time, also believe, Never 

again. But yet we live in a world today where we continue to allow 

these things to exist. The more we can learn from our past, the 

more we can educate our children, our adults, our grandparents, 

the more we can learn from these experiences in our country and 

around the world, and we can be a beacon, along with other countries, of high moral values and understanding that this is unacceptable on so many levels, the better we will be and the better our 

children will be and future generations will be. And it is going to 

take vigilance to do that. 

I also understand the importance of the Turkish relationship 

with the United States and with our allies in the Middle East. And 

I can’t speculate what is going to happen. I don’t think any of us 

can do that. We have heard signals, we have heard expressions. I 

would only hope that we who recognize, and I think this entire 

Congress and the rest of the United States recognizes that the 

Turkish country, the Turkish Government of today is a very important ally of the United States. They provide support for our military. They work with us in intelligence. And they are friends of our 

friends in the Middle East. 

We need to continue to have that relationship with them. And 

hopefully, this will not provide any long-term disruption, hopefully 

not even any short-term, because they need us and we need them. 

And I stand ready to do what we need to do to make sure that Turkey understands that message. 

This is a historical situation that took place in a different time 

with a different government, but there still needs to be historical 

recognition and acknowledgment. My friends who came forward 

and asked me to support this, the Armenian population in my community, said this is not about reparations, this is not about restitution, this is about historical acknowledgment. I take them at their 

words for that, that this is not going to open up some future discussion about that. 

But the point is this is an important moment in time that we 

recognize what did happen. There was loss of life. There was terrible inhumanity. And for that reason I will support this resolution 

today. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman LANTOS. I believe every colleague who wished to be 

heard had an opportunity to speak. 

Before calling for a vote, I wish to advise everyone that at the 

next markup it is my intention to bring forth a resolution reaffirmVerDate Mar 21 2002 14:49 Jan 04, 2008 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\FULL\101007M\38188.000 DOUG PsN: DOUG
48

ing the friendship and alliance between Turkey and the United 

States of America. 

Let me also say to all of my colleagues, this was one of the finest 

hours of the Foreign Affairs Committee, and I am deeply proud of 

every single member of this committee. 

The chairman is prepared to receive a motion from the gentleman from California, Mr. Sherman. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move the favorable 

recommendation of H. Res. 106 to the House. 

Chairman LANTOS. The clerk will read the roll. 

Ms. RUSH. Chairman Lantos. 

Chairman LANTOS. Aye. 

Ms. RUSH. Chairman Lantos votes yes. 

Mr. Berman. 

Mr. BERMAN. Aye. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Berman votes yes. 

Mr. Ackerman. 

Mr. ACKERMAN. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Ackerman votes yes. 

Mr. Faleomavaega. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Faleomavaega votes yes. 

Mr. Payne. 

Mr. PAYNE. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Payne votes yes. 

Mr. Sherman. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Sherman votes yes. 

Mr. Wexler. 

Mr. WEXLER. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Wexler votes no. 

Mr. Engel. 

Mr. ENGEL. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Engel votes yes. 

Mr. Delahunt. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Delahunt votes yes. 

Mr. Meeks. 

[No response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Ms. Watson. 

Ms. WATSON. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Ms. Watson votes yes. 

Mr. Smith of Washington. 

Mr. SMITH OF WASHINGTON. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Smith of Washington votes no. 

Mr. Carnahan. 

Mr. CARNAHAN. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Carnahan votes no. 

Mr. Tanner. 

Mr. TANNER. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Tanner votes no. 

Mr. Green. 

Mr. GREEN. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Green votes yes. 

49

Ms. Woolsey. 

Ms. WOOLSEY. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Ms. Woolsey votes yes. 

Ms. Jackson Lee. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Aye. 

Ms. RUSH. Ms. Jackson Lee votes yes. 

Mr. Hinojosa. 

Ms. HINOJOSA. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Hinojosa votes no. 

Mr. Crowley. 

Mr. CROWLEY. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Crowley votes yes. 

Mr. Wu. 

Mr. WU. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Wu votes yes. 

Mr. Miller. 

Mr. MILLER. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Miller votes no. 

Ms. Sa ́nchez. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Aye. 

Ms. RUSH. Ms. Sa ́nchez votes yes. 

Mr. Scott. 

Mr. SCOTT. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Scott votes no. 

Mr. Costa. 

Mr. COSTA. Aye. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Costa votes yes. 

Mr. Sires. 

Mr. SIRES. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Sires votes yes. 

Ms. Giffords. 

[No response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Klein. 

Mr. KLEIN. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Klein votes yes. 

Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Ms. Ros-Lehtinen votes no. 

Mr. Smith of New Jersey.

Mr. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Smith of New Jersey votes yes. 

Mr. Burton. 

Mr. BURTON. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Burton votes no. 

Mr. Gallegly. 

[No response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Rohrabacher.

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Rohrabacher votes yes. 

Mr. Manzullo. 

[No response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Royce. 

Mr. ROYCE. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Royce votes yes. 

50

Mr. Chabot. 

Mr. CHABOT. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Chabot votes yes. 

Mr. Blunt. 

Mr. BLUNT. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Blunt votes no. 

Mr. Tancredo. 

Mr. TANCREDO. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Tancredo votes no. 

Mr. Paul. 

[No response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Flake. 

Mr. FLAKE. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Flake votes no. 

Mr. Pence. 

Mr. PENCE. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Pence votes no. 

Mr. Wilson. 

[No response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Boozman. 

Mr. BOOZMAN. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Boozman votes no. 

Mr. Barrett. 

Mr. BARRETT. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Barrett votes no. 

Mr. Mack. 

Mr. MACK. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Mack votes no. 

Mr. Fortenberry. 

Mr. FORTENBERRY. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Fortenberry votes no. 

Mr. McCaul. 

Mr. MCCAUL. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. McCaul votes yes. 

Mr. Poe. 

Mr. POE. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Poe votes no. 

Mr. Inglis. 

Mr. INGLIS. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Inglis votes no. 

Mr. Fortun ̃ o. 

Mr. FORTUN ̃ O. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Fortun ̃ o votes no. 

Mr. Bilirakis. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Bilirakis votes yes. 

Chairman LANTOS. Have all members voted? Mr. Meeks? 

Mr. MEEKS. Am I recorded? 

Ms. RUSH. You are not recorded. 

Mr. MEEKS. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Meeks votes no. 

Chairman LANTOS. Mr. Manzullo? 

Mr. MANZULLO. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Manzullo votes yes. 

51

Chairman LANTOS. Are there any other members who wish to be 

recorded? If not, the clerk will report. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman LANTOS. Mr. Gallegly. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. How am I recorded? 

Chairman LANTOS. Mr. Gallegly wishes to be recorded. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. Aye. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Gallegly votes yes. 

Chairman LANTOS. The clerk will report. 

Ms. RUSH. On this vote there are 26 ayes and 21 nays. 

Chairman LANTOS. The ayes have it. The resolution—— [Disturbance in the hearing room.] 

Chairman LANTOS. I have to ask the audience to respect the dignity of this committee room. And I will give an opportunity to my 

colleague to cast a vote. 

Ms. GIFFORDS. Mr. Chairman, I vote aye. 

Ms. RUSH. Ms. Giffords votes yes. 

The new total is 27 ayes and 21 nays. 

Mr. BURTON. Mr. Chairman? 

Chairman LANTOS. Mr. Burton. 

Mr. BURTON. Mr. Chairman, I request members be allowed 2 additional calendar days to file additional dissenting or minority 

views. 

Chairman LANTOS. Without objection, so ordered. 

The ayes have it. The resolution is adopted, and this markup session is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 5;18 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

(53)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE BRAD SHERMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

My Colleagues: Here we are again considering the Armenian Genocide resolution. 

House Committees have done so four times this decade. Yet we have never had a 

Floor vote. 

There are those who say that every time this Resolution comes up it is an irritant 

in our relationship with Turkey. I would say that is the best reason to vote for it. 

Let us move it to the Floor; let us pass it; and then it is done. We will get some 

angry words out of Ankara for a few days, and then it is over. And I promise you 

that after this passes, I am not coming back, and my friends are not coming back, 

with new Resolutions. 

Two years ago, we dealt with an identical resolution. The history was, of course, 

the same then as it is now. The words of the resolution were exactly the same. 

The geo-political situation, pretty much the same. Turkey still borders Iraq as it 

did in 2005. 

The role of the Committee is still the same: to speak truth on human rights 

abuses, even when our friends object. For example, just a few months ago this Committee passed, over the strong objection of the Japanese government, a resolution 

talking about those referred to as ‘‘comfort women.’’

Only one thing has changed, and that is ferocious lobbying effort. Two years ago, 

we passed this exact same resolution 40–7, and the vote ought to be the same here 

today. 

What happened in 1915 to 1923? In the area now encompassed by Turkey, the 

Armenian population was two million. Eight years later, it was virtually zero. Our 

own ambassador to the Ottoman Empire stated what happened: ‘‘When the authorities gave the orders for these deportations they were merely giving the death warrant to a whole race. They understood this well, and in their conversations with me, 

they made no particular attempt to conceal the fact.’’

Or turn to Mustaffa Arriff, the last minister of the Interior of the Ottoman Empire, who said, ‘‘Our wartime leaders . . . decided to exterminate the Armenians, 

and they did exterminate them.’’

It is right for this Congress to recognize a genocide, particularly when it is denied. 

Genocide denial is not only the last step of a genocide, it is the first step in the 

next genocide. When Hitler had to convince his cohorts that the world would let 

them get away with it, he turned to them and said, ‘‘Who today speaks of the annihilation of the Armenians?’’

We cannot provide genocide denial as one of the perks of friendship with the 

United States. 

Opponents say that Turkey will be angry. Well Japan is important and an ally, 

and that did not stop us when we had to recognize what had happened to those 

women in World War II. This Committee has condemned particular actions of such 

great allies such as England and Canada. 

Let me give you a hypothetical: what if some future German government adopts 

a new revisionist view of history and demands that we tear down the Holocaust Museum. Who would go down to the Floor and talk about the importance of Ramstad 

Air Base (located in Germany) as a reason for us to tear down the Holocaust Museum. 

We are told that if we pass this resolution Turkey will react against us. Beyond 

the moral bankruptcy of such threats, lies Turkey’s long-standing practice of trying 

to win through intimidation, and then when a resolution is passed, doing little or 

nothing. Despite threats of harsh retribution, Turkey has taken either no steps at 

54

all, or token diplomatic steps, against Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Argentina, and 10 other countries that have recognized the Armenian Genocide. 

Some 40 United States have recognized the Armenian Genocide, and their trade 

with Turkey has gone up. My own state of California recognized the Armenian 

Genocide and our exports to Turkey are doing just fine, thank you. 

The best example, and the biggest battle, was France, which in 2001 was threatened by Turkey with a trade boycott if it recognized the Armenian Genocide. The 

French recognized that Genocide. That chart shows you what happens, a near tripling of French exports to Turkey.

Turkey’s bilateral trade increased significantly following the recognition of the Armenian Genocide by many countries, including: Belgium 167%, Canada 22%, Greece 

266%, Italy 109%, Lebanon 126%, and Russia 351%. 

Turkey should not be making threats because we have done far more for them 

then they have for us. After World War II, we protected them from Communism and 

provided over $23 billion of military aid. Recently, we have helped build the 

Ceyhan-Baku pipeline to get oil into Turkey. In Iraq, we have prevented the creation of an independent Kurdish state. And most importantly of all, we have been 

loudest and most important advocate for Turkey’s overriding goal, which is to become a member of the European Union. 

This resolution is supported by virtual every scholar of genocide, and by both the 

Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) and the Arab-American Institute. 

Finally, we are asked, ‘‘Why act now?’’ Turkey will be a better ally if we speak 

the truth. Turkey will be an even better ally if Turkey speaks the truth. 

But we also have very personal reasons. We have with us four victims of the genocide. They are in their 90 and 100s. I’ll tell you their stories later in today’s discussions. We cannot tell them, ‘‘Wait. Come back in a few years.’’ Let these survivors 

see the country that gave them refuge also give them justice—while they are still 

here to see it. 

On February 19, 2000, George W. Bush said, ‘‘The Armenians were subjected to 

a genocidal campaign that defies comprehension and commands all decent people 

to remember and acknowledge the facts...’’

He used the word genocide. He urged all decent people to ‘‘acknowledge the facts.’’

Be a decent person. Acknowledge the facts. Vote for the Resolution. 


38188a.eps
55

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JIM COSTA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

‘‘Thank you Chairman Lantos for bringing such an important resolution before the 

Foreign Affairs Committee for mark-up, and for the profiles in courage that you, as 

our Chairman, and our Speaker are demonstrating today that this measure should 

be heard in the House of Representatives. 

‘‘The importance of Turkey as an ally to the United States, both as a supporter 

of the War on Terrorism and our efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq obviously have 

been well stated and should not be taken for granted and I certainly don’t, but I 

do support this resolution. Much has been said about the potential impact on our 

national security in the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. But I would ask 

my colleagues who have this concern to note that in fact when Russia recognized 

the Armenian genocide in 1995 their trade with Turkey has since increased by 351 

percent. When Greece recognized the genocide—who have had tensions over centuries with Turkey—in 1997, their trade has since increased by 266 percent. And 

yes, the European Parliament passed last year a set of economic conditions and social conditions prior to the entry of Turkey into the European Union; one of those 

conditions was the recognition of the Armenian Genocide and Turkey still, to this 

day, seeks entry into the European Union. Nation-states at the end of the day, ultimately, notwithstanding their own internal politics, do what is in their best interest. 

Because of the assistance we provide in foreign aid and the important relationship 

that we have with Turkey, I believe that in fact if we pass this resolution, Turkey 

will not like it, but they certainly will do what is in their best interest and that 

will be to continue to have a relationship between our great nations. 

‘‘But for me, as I suspect as it is for others on the Committee, this resolution involves one issue—the simple matter of man’s injustice to mankind . . . as it has 

occurred in Rwanda, Cambodia, Bosnia, the Holocaust, and in this instance, this 

resolution is about the Armenian Genocide. 

‘‘In May 2006, I went on a Codel to Iraq, Turkey and Greece with my colleague 

Mr. Pence. As we traveled through Turkey, we had a meeting with Abdulla Gu ̈l, at 

that time he was the Foreign Minister and today he is the President of Turkey. I’d 

like to relay a part of our conversation to the members of this Committee. I talked 

about the positive relationship with Turkey and America and our long standing 

friendship. That modern day Turkey stands for a successful, secular democracy, a 

responsible nation-state on the world stage. 

‘‘But I also told him that all nations in the world have periods of their history 

that they’d soon forget. I explained that slavery in early America is one of our chapters that many would overlook . . . And even some of our beloved Founding Fathers 

held slaves. Slavery created turmoil in our nation for decades, and was one of the 

causes the Civil War. The issues of civil rights in America continued for 100 years 

following the Civil War, resulting in the Civil Rights Act passed by Congress in 

1964. And despite this monumental legislation, we still have problems today in our 

country, but we acknowledge and we confront them just as modern day Turkey 

should. 

‘‘The purpose of the resolution today is not to belittle the accomplishments of Turkey; but rather to acknowledge an event that occurred in the early 20th century 

. . . involving a plan to remove people from their homes and lands, and sadly, 

evolved into one of the first genocides in the modern world. Modern day Turkey was 

not responsible for that genocide but they should acknowledge it and they should 

move on. It is important we acknowledge this fact, in an effort to heal the wounds 

and build new relations among Turkey, Armenia, and the world communities. 

‘‘One can debate specific incidents, but growing up in Fresno, California, the land 

of William Saroyan, I can tell you I heard stories as a boy from grandparents of 

my friends—the Kezerian, Koligian and Abrahamian families about being forced to 

leave their homes, the stories of the long marches that evolved into the massacres 

and murders of women and children. Clearly, they believed there was a systematic 

approach to eliminate the Armenian communities in places that had been their 

homes and farms for centuries. My Armenian friends believe that what happened 

between 1915–1923 was a systematic approach, and was among the first genocides 

of the 20th century, and so do I. 

‘‘This resolution is not meant to reopen the wounds or degenerate the importance 

of our relationship with the Turkish people or their government . . . and an important ally. But my vote in favor of this resolution is to accurately reflect history. It 

is important that we support this measure, and move on. I urge an ‘Aye’ vote.’’

Æ