Ties That Blind
by Vera Beaudin Saeedpour, Director of Research
Turkey's repressive Kurdish policy represents the antithesis of values
Jews
espouse. Yet the state of Israel has not only kept silent on Turkey's
treatment of the Kurds, it has been in the forefront of promoting Turkey's
image and Turkey's interests abroad. Prominent members of the Jewish
community in the United States have worked to undermine recognition of thc
Armenian genocide as well. In 1992 Jews and Turks held celebrations to
mark
500 years of Turkish "tolerance." Why is this so? In large part because
Jews
equate their survival with that of Israel, a fragile state in a precarious
part of the world. And this value takes precedence over the historical
concern of Jews with ethical issues.
In this Israel is not alone. All nations are pre-occupied with
strengthening
their economies, enhancing their power, and assuring their survival at the
expense of loftier values to which they tend to pay lip service when there
is need to justify or obscure policies. Stateless people such as the Kurds
are natural flotsam in the interplay of geopolitics, gaining attention and
significance, or relegated to obscurity in almost direct pro****tion to
their
utility in furthering, or at least in not threatening the agendas of
existing states. Such helps to explain why sup****ters of Israel have long
been promoting the cause of the Iraqi Kurds while ignoring and suppressing
the fact of Kurdish repression in Turkey.
History to Live Up To
Remember Bitburg? TheJewish communitywas outragedwith President Reagan for
agreeing to visit the graves of German soldiers. Elie Wiesel said, "That
place, Mr. President, is not your place. Your place is with the victims of
the SS..." Wiesel went on to talk of what he had learned in the past
fortyyears: "I learned that in extreme situations when human lives and
dignity are at stake, neutrality is a sin...Jews were killed by the enemy,
but betrayed by their so-called Allies who found political reasons to
justify their indifference or passivity...I have learned the danger of
indifference, the crime of indifference." (Congressional Record, Vol. 131
No. 47, 4.22.85)
When Czech president, Vadav Havel, visited Kurt Waldheim in Austria, New
York Times pundit A. H. Rosenthal mounted the moral high ground to remind
him that "Now and then even a philosopher-hero should take account of the
emotions and values of the people who do remember yesterday and its
lessons."(NYT 9.29.90)
In 1990 when the U.S. moved to condemn Israel's response to the
Palestinian
uprising, Jewish groups charged that the U.S. betrayed Israel and "its own
honor." Rabbi MarcAngel, president of the Rabbinical Council of America
called "American complicity in this hypocrisy...alarming." And he asked,
''Will oil and terrorism become the arbiters of justice in the world?"
(NYT
10.11.90)
It is no accident that Rabbi Angel alluded to justice. For not love, but
justice is the foundation of Jewish ethics. Justice demands equal
application of the same standard one invokes to *****s the acts of one's
friends and one's adversaries. If not, such lofty declamations are
relegated
to the moral ash heap. Yet, to keep on Turkey's good side, sup****ters of
Israel have become accomplices in denying the Armenian genocide. To stay
in
Turkey's good graces, Jews have remained silent on Turkey's repression of
more than 15 million Kurds, over half the Kurds in the Middlc East, even
as
sup****ters of Israel court Kurds in Iraq.
Menachem Rosensaft, chairman of the International Network of Children of
Jewish Holocaust survivors had this to say about the responsibility of
Jews,
"We must take our place at the forefront of the struggle against racial
hatred and oppression of any kind, and to accept the heavy responsibility
inherent in our unique id.entity." (NY Post 5.28.88) But he also askedJews
to "identify unambiguously with Israel." And therein lies the dilemma.
History to Live Down
Look at a few highlights of Turkey's history. The Ottoman forebears of the
modern Turks swooped down from outer Mongolia to conquer the Middle East
up
to the borders of the Persian Empire and to occupy a vast domain populated
by Christians and Muslims. Details of the conquests still live in dusty
stacks in our nation's libraries, though they remain an enigma to most
Americans who still have trouble locating that part of the world on the
map.
And what a dismal history it is.
The Janissaries, crack troops of the Ottoman Sultan, were Christian boys
forcibly taken from their mothers before they reached the age of eight and
raised as Muslims and defenders of the Empire. As men they were turned
loose
to murder those who gave them life. History holds other times when
Christian
mothers wept. For instance, on September 18,1824, nearlytwo centuries ago,
the Salem Observer informed Massachusetts readers of "the cruelties of the
Turks. On entering Melenia, they put to the sword all the Christians above
eight years of age, and at Pergamos, they massacred in thirty eight hours,
ten thousand Christians." The New York Times of October 11,1917 noted that
before the first crusade, the Arabs had never persecuted Christian
pilgrims
to Jerusalem and the Holy Sepulchre, "But the Seljukian Turks changed all
that when they occupied all Syria and the Holy Land in the eleventh
century.
They persecuted Arab, Jew and Christian pilgrim alike." And all their
women
wept.
Five years later, American Consul to Smyrna, George Horton penned these
unhappy words: "I have often been impressed with the hopelessness of
making
people who have not been eye-witnesses, comprehend the dreadful character
of
the massacres which are carried on by the Turks against the Christian
population of the Orient...One of the keenest impressions which I brought
away with me from Smyrna was a feeling of shame that I belonged to the
human
race...the Turks were glutting freely their racial and religious lust for
slaughter, rape and plunder within a stone's throw of the Allied and
American battle-****ps because they had been systematically led to believe
that they would not be interfered with...And this, the presence of those
battle-****ps in Smyrna harbor, in the year of our Lord 1922, impotently
watching the last great scene in the tragedy of the Christians of Turkey,
was the saddest and most significant feature of the whole
picture...Christians were abandoned as no Christian power desired to
offend
the Turk, from whom great benefits were expected...It is a curious fact
that
the Turk is still able to deceive Europeans, despite long observation of
his
tactics..." (Re****t on Turkey, USA Consular Do***ents)
Never mind the historical record. The record of Turkey in this century
alone
is rife with massacres, atrocities and repression. Ask any Armenian, Alevi
Arab or Kurd. Yet, in 1986 after the massacre of Jews in the Neve Shalom
synagogue in Istanbul, Turkey's Permanent Representative to the United
Nations had no qualms about defending his country's "historical record of
religious tolerance and non discrimination." This at a time when the total
suppression of Kurds in the country had reached its sixty first year and
counting. "...all Turkish citizens are under the protection of the state
irrespective of their religion, language, race and color," he proclaimed.
As
Jewish women wept . (NYT 9.10.86)
Of millions of Christians who fell under Ottoman dominion, Christians of
all
kinds number less than 0.5% of Turkey's population today. Of the more than
200,000 Jews in the Ottoman Empire at the turn of the century, barely
20,000
remained to witness the synagogue massacre in 1986. Even less now. And for
more than sixty years after the genocide of Armenians it has been the
Kurds'
turn to be assimilated - or else. And still Kurdish women weep. The
argument
that the Turk of today is not the Turk of yesterday is a subterfuge.
Turkey
has yet to acknowledge the Armenian genocide. As this is written, the
decimation of Kurds is still underway in a country that is nowhere near
the
secular democracy that Ankara and its allies claim.
"Jews who were admitted into the Ottoman Empire bySultan Bayazid 11 are of
the opinion that claims of genocide in Jvrkey are ties. " David Asseo,
Istanbul's Chief Rabbi
Relations between Israel and Turkey
Jews were undcrstandablygrateful to Ottoman Turks whogave them refuge when
they fled the Spanish Inquisition in 1492. Not that the Turks were
motivated
by altruism. Time and again history records that Jews were allowed into
countries to finance a ruler's misadventures. Denied land owner****p, they
served as craftsmen and money-lenders. When the time for repayment came,
more often than not theywere expelled. Understandably Jews were
appreciative
when the non-Arab government of Turkey officially recognized Israel's
statehood in 1948. But they were less pleased when Turkey reacted to
Israel's incor****ation of East Jerusalem evicting the Israeli ambassador
to
Ankara and lowering diplomatic exchanges between the two countries to the
level of second secretaries. However, as they looked to polish their image
and further their economic interests in the U.S. it wasn't long before the
Turks concluded that the Jewish lobby and Jewish media influence could be
of
great use. Israel's sup****ters acquiesced, eager as they always are to
find
a friend of any ilk in an otherwise unfriendly Middle East, especially a
friend blessed by the United States.
George Gruen, the American Jewish Committee's Director of Middle East
Affairs explained Turke's motives in an interview that appeared in the
Jewish Exponent: "Ankara believes that good relations with Israel are
helpful in building sup****t for Turkey in the United States...Not onlycan
it
argue that the U.S. should look favorably on Turkey since, with the
exception of Egypt, it is the only Middle Eastern state which has
relations
with Israel, but Ankara also can use its relations with Israel as a lever
both with Israel and with the 'Jewish lobby' to enlist their help in
obtaining sup****t for Turkey. ("Turkey's Jews: Taking the pulse of a
community" JE 6.30.89)
If the past decade is any indication, when the government of Turkey
speaks,
the government of Israel listens. In the Spring of 1982 when Jews
scheduled
an International Conference on Genocide in Tel Aviv, they invited
Armenians
to participate. Ankara protested. The Israeli Government moved swiftly to
get organizers to cancel insisting that the conference as planned would
threaten "the humanitarian interest of Jews." The New York Tmes explained
what "humanitarian interest" meant. Organizers were told by Israeli
officials that Turkey meant to sever diplomatic relations and had
threatened
"the lives and livelihood of the 18,000 Jews" in the country.(NYT 6.3.82
and
6.4.82)
To drive home the message, Ankara even sent a delegation of Jews from
Istanbul who warned that they could be in jeopardy if the conference
included Armenians. Chairman Elie Wlesel was first quoted as saying, "I
will
not discriminate against the Armenians, I will not hurniliate them."
Later,
citing threats to the lives of Jews in Turkeyn he resigned.
Publicity surrounding the controversy brought pressure on the Israeli
government from other Jews responding to an even higher authority. The
conference went ahead as planned, with a handful of attendees and Armenian
participants.(NYT 6.16.82) Turkey's Foreign Ministry spokesman Nazem
Akiman
expressed satisfaction with Israel's decision to keep govern- ment
officials
from attending. HWe are not against the con- ference in Tel Aviv but
oppose
any linkage of the Holocaust to the Armenian allegations of genocide," he
told the press.(NYT 6.5.82)
When Israeli forces entered Lebanon, Israel's relation****p with Turkey
soured. Ankara deplored the move and urged that they "end their
aggression."
(NYT 6.8.82) Israeli diplomats managed however, to placate Ankara by
making
available in- telligence obtained in Lebanon on the Armenian group ASALA.
But the two countries continued with only minimal diplomatic ties and did
not exchange of ficial visits until the Fall of 1984 when Turkish MP's
were
again dispatched to Jerusalem. In Ankara there was outrage among Muslim
Turks sympathetic to Palestinians. (Greek American 1.31.87) But pragmatism
won out over internal opposition. Wlth a com- bination of pressure on
Turkey's tiny Jewish community and threats to close the border to Jews
fleeing Iran, the Turks managed to get the ear of Jews in the United
States,
in par- ticular the powerful American Jewish Congress. Turkey's President
Ozal met with AJC leaders (Foreign Minister Vahit Halefoglu met secretly
with Meir Rosenne, Israel's Ambas- sador to the U.S.) to request that they
use their influence with Congress to increase foreign aid and decrease
attention to things Armenian. (Israeli Foreign Affairs, 6.85. Reprinted in
Azbarez 9.28.85)
Members of Turkey's Jewish community were also recruited to promote its
public relations agenda. In 1985 when a UCLA professor of Armenian history
spoke at a meeting of the Los Angeles Jewish Federation Council, the
organizers received a cable of protest from Istanbul's Chief Rabbi. To
make
sure they got the message Ambassador Sukru Elekdag launched his own
protest
with the World Jewish Congress in New York. When California Appeals Court
Justice Arabian made a speech on the Armenian genocide, Turkish diplomats
telephoned a protest to officials of the B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation
League.
Murray Wood, the Federation Council's Director of Com- munity Relations
explained the dilemma: HJewish leaders say they feel whipsawed by Turkish
pressure because of Turkey's long record of tolerance towardJews. Turkeyis
the onlyIslamic nation besides Egypt with diplomatic relations with
Israel.
We don't want to jeopardize that. The Turkish government has also extended
humanitarian aid to Jews from Iran, North Africa and the Soviet Union. But
Wood went further to describe what he saw as an implied threat behind the
messages from Turkish officials and Turkish Jews. "The message: play down
the Ar- menian genocide or risk Turkey closing its borders with Iran,
across
which several thousand Jews have fled from the Ayatol- lah. Also Jewish
recognition of the Armenian genocide could lead to poorer treatment of
Jews
in Turkey." (Azbarez 2.2.85; 2.9.85)
Major Jewish organizations chose not to expose Turkey's blackmail. Instcad
they continued to deploy expertise and in- fluence to make lirkey look
good.
And they maintained the silence on Kurdish repression in Turkey. The
irony?
What Turkey has been doing to the Kurds for decades, which is noth- ing
but
"ethnic cleansing," parallels the religious cleansing that threatened and
took the lives of Jews over the centuries.
Turkey's Jewish Lobby
In 1986 a 13-member delegation from the American Jewish Congress visited
Ankara, ostensibly on the invitation of Istanbul's Chief Rabbi. On their
return, AJC president and delegation leader Theodore Mann prepared a
letter
(August 15,1986) that fell into the hands of Armenians sparkingamajor
controversy. Affirming the strength of Israel-Turkey ties, Mann explained
the reasons for the group's visit: "The US. Congress, pressured as it is
by
Greek Americans, and by Armenian Americans as well, who claim that their
ancestors were victims of a holocaust in 1915 at the hands of the Turks,
has
not been as appreciative of Turkers geopolitical im****tance as it shouid
be.
Turkeyrs leader****p shares what is becoming the conven- tionalviewthat
AmericanJews are extremelypowerful. (I need hardly note that such
extravagant notions of Jewish power give me great concern.) Our invitation
was one step by which the Turkish government hopes to begin to impact upon
American public opinion...Turkegs leader****p is deeply concerned that its
reputation in the human rights field has been wrongly tar- nished, and
that
this impacts negatively on European and American political figures,
dimini****ng its chances of accep- tance in the European Economic Community
and of increased American aid...That is probably why the Turkish Minister
of
State with whom we met committed to us, in the presence of the leader****p
of
the Jewish Community and of the American Am- bassador to Turkey, that
Turkey
would undertake a major celebration in 1992 of the 500th anniversary of
the
humane reception accorded by the Otttoman Empire to the Jews ex- pelled
from
Spain and ****tugal at the height of the Inquisition. This is regarded as a
matter of considerable im****tance to the Turkish Jewish community and,
indeed, could become an event of considerable im****tance in the Jewish
world
generally. We advised the Minister of State that the American Jewish Con-
gress... would certainly advise the Jewish community throughout the United
States and, to the extent possible, the general community of the
substantial
improvement in human rights within Turkey over the past few years, of the
secure life that Turkish Jews continue to live, of the improving relation
****ps between Turkey and Israel, and of the im****tance that we place in a
strong and durable relation****p between the United States and Turkey."
Here's the text that caused the controversy with the Armcnians: "For the
same reason - their concern that Turkey's human rights reputation has been
wrongly tarnished - Armenian allegations of a holocaust are a matter of
the
greatest sensitivity to the Turks. You may be interested in reading a
major
statement on the subject by a number of eminent historians and
scholars..But
even though so many serious scholars cast doubt on the allegations, I will
not comment, even in this personal letter, about the merits of the
Armenian
charge. It is not for the American Jewish community to deny someone else's
claim to a holocaust...In the weeks ahead, we will be considering what
further steps might be taken to enhance the relation****ps between the
United
States and Turkey, and between Turkey and Israel."
"what ever happened between the Turks and Armenians is not our business "
member of the Istanbul Jewis coommunity
The Armenian National Committee called the Mann letter "a whitewash of
Turkey's role in the Genocide." Phil Baum, AJC's Associate Director
insisted
that the letter was private. But the flurry of protests by concerned
Congressmen and other public figures prompted an apology from Mann. "There
is not room for doubt on the massacre of unimaginable magnitude that was
one
of this century's great tragedies," he wrote. (Azbarez 11.86)
Ironically, a year later, when Pope Paul II allowed Austrian President
Kurt
Waldheim a Vatican audience, the American Jewish Congress bought a full
page
in the New York Tims to publicly condemn his lack of "sensitivity" to
Jewish
feelings. The AJC stressed that "the most sacred command of our generation
is memory, not to forget how silence became indifference, indifference
became complicity, and finally turned into a nightmare of slaughter...Kurt
Waldheim represents the antithesis of memory. He is the ultimate symbol of
denial and evasion." Nor was the leader of the Catholic faith spared the
AJC's moral sword: "How is one to explain so profound an insensitivity to
the meaning of the Holocaust, so painful a failure of the moral
imagination,
by the custodian of the Catholic conscience...Isn't it true that alongwith
so much ofthe rest of the world, the official churches were largely silent
and abandoned the Jews to their agony? And if the church, to which
millions
look for moral guidance, cannot yet come to terms with its past, if it
cannot respond to the demands of sacred memory, what hope is there for
others?" The letter was signed by none other than Theodore R. Mann,
President of the American Jewish Congress. (NYT 6.26.87)
Barely three weeks after Mann wrote his controversial letter, 21 Jews were
massacred in an Istanbul synagogue, including 7 rabbis. Arab terrorists
were
blamed. (NYT 9.7.86) But clearly there was much to suggest that the
perpetrators were not Arabs. Held three days later, the funeral was
attended
by Inte rior Minister Akbulut. President Ozal, Evren and the armed forces
kept their distance and sent wreaths instead. The Mufti of Istanbul was
noticeably absent. The only prominent Israeli present was Israel's Chief
Rabbi. Ankara made it clear that a cabinet minister would "not be
welcome."
(NYT 9.11.86) A subsequent re****t on the reopening of the synagogue quoted
the congregation's president as saying, "I think the investigation is
probably closed without a solution." (NYT 5.21.87)
In 1988 President Ozal visited the U.S. and met with leaders of the
American
Jewish Congress in New York. Months later, another AJC delegation was
dispatched to Istanbul. According to the Turkish daily,***hunyet(2.18.89)
they were scheduled to meet with Foreign Minister Mesut Yilmaz, U.S.
Ambassador Strauss-Hope, and U.S. Consul T. Carolan for briefings on
Turkish
U.S. relations and the status of Jews living in Turkey. ***hunyet also
re****ted that four members of the delegation would meet with Yilmaz to
discuss "the assistance of the Jewish lobby in getting Turkey known in the
U.S." George Gruen, whom the paper described as the group's "Middle East
expert" led the delegation. When asked whether the "Jewish Lobbywould join
Tirkey against Greek and Armenian lobbies in the U.S., he replied, "I want
to make it clear that we are not a lobby firm. We have been established to
protect the rights of the Jewish community in the U.S...We cannot take the
side of Greece, Turkey or the Armenians. But if Ozal or Yilmaz ask, we
will
do whatever we can to help Turkey. In the end the defense of the Turkish
thesis rests with Turkey, not with us." (***huriyet, 2.13.92) But in 1991
at
the height of the Gulf crisis, George Gruen masked his affiliation with
the
American Je vish Committee to write in sup****t of Turkey's claim to
northern
Iraq. (NY Newsday 1.21.91).
As the delegates met with the Turks, the appointment of Morris Abramowitz
as
U.S. Ambassador to llurkey was confirmed. ***humyet announced that "The
American Jewish lobby, having learned of the status of Ibrkish Jews and
the
certainty of the appointment of Abramowitz, who is of Jewish origin, as
Ambassador to Ankara, left Turkeyyesterday morning in good spirits."
(***huriyet 2.15.89) Calling Abramowitz "a strong sup****ter of Israel,"
Milliyet noted that he would be the third Jewish diplomat in Turkey in
addition to Israel's representative and France's Ambassador Eric Rouleau
and
assured readers that his appointment would "strengthen the Jewish lobby"
and
convey Turkey's "real difficulties to Wa****ngton. (Milliyet, 2.16.89)
In subsequent testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
Ambassador Abramowitz actually split with President Bush on the issue of
the
genocide. Asked about Turkey's denial, he answered that it was "unclear
whether or not a genocide took place." He also conveyed the "deep
resentment" on the part of the Turkish Government regarding the issue and
suggested that for these reasons "it should be left to historians."
(Azbarez
6.17.89)
Steven Solarz, "Congressman from Istanbul"
Other prominent Jews have been engaged in promoting Turkey's interests.
One
is former Democratic House member Steven Solarz of Brooklyn, called by the
Turkish press a "proTurkish Congressman." (Hurriyet 12.9.85) This wasn't
always the case. As a freshman in Congress Solarz actually co-introduced
Res. 269 to designate April 24, 1975 as a "Day of Remembrance of Man's
inhumanity to Man" and Res. 148 to commemorate victims of genocide, both
induding the Armenians. When a year later he authored legislation
requiring
the National Institute of Education to develop a genocide curriculum, he
recommended the Holocaust and the Genocide for inclusion. In a letter to
an
Armenian organization in 1982, Solarz said, "I have no personal doubt, and
indeed have said on many public occasions that the slaughter of a million
or
more Armenians by the Turks was one of the most unjust and unconscionable
events of human history, and I certainly join you in deploring it." (1982
letter to an Armenian-American organization)
Then like the weather, Solarz turned around. Re****tedly he was informed by
letter from the Jewish community in Turkey that refusal to cooperate could
jeopardize their wellbeing. In a subsequent statement on a resolution
introduced in 1985 Solarz justified his change of heart in this way "One
of
the problems with this resolution is that it asserts what happened to the
Armenians was a genocide when the fact that it was a genocide is itself in
dispute...There is no evidence that I am aware of which demonstrates that
the Ottomans were trying to exterminate all Armenians." (Congressional
Record 12.12.85)
With the passing of time, his opposition increased. In a letter designed
to
obtain financial sup****t from Turkish physicians (June 1988) the
Congressman
wrote, "For over a decade in the U.S. Congress I've worked hard to advance
the interests of the Turkish people...to ensure a significant and
substantial foreign aid program for Turkey abroad and to expand the rights
of Turkish Americans here at home." Armenians charged that he had "sold
out
for a $60,000 contribution to his war chest from Turks." "Why can't I
sup****t the people who sup****t my work?" he countered. (Brooklyn Paper
3.8.89)
Through the Revolving Door- Richard Perle
When Ross Perrot entered the national political arena, one of his first
criticisms was that too often people in government service parlay insider
knowledge and experience into lucrative jobs as advisors or lobbyists for
foreign interests. Former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense, Richard
Perle
is a caseinpoint.
Foreign governments with active and powerful constituencies in the United
States tend to deal directly with representatives on Capitol Hill and have
their own methods of disseminating information to sup****t their agendas.
On
the other hand, Turkey relies on lobbyists with connections and influence
in
the administration to sell their case to Congress. In 1984, the Wa****ngton
Times re****ted that Turkey was paying$300,000 to Gray and Co., a
Wa****ngton
based firm with ties to the Reagan Administration and influential
Democrats.
At that time Frank Mankiewicz, former head of National Public Radio and
Gray
Hymel, former aide to House Speaker Tip O'Neil were Ankara's chief
lobbyists. (Azbarez 6.84) Prior to the establishment of Perle's lobbying
firm, Turkey engaged Hill & Knowlton to oversee public relations in the
U.S.
In 1989 they also recruited the British firm of Saatchi & Saatchi, a
company
of Iraqi Jews, to polish their image and promote member****p in the EEC.
(Armenian Re****ter 6.23.89)
In 1989, the Turkish press re****ted that Richard Perle was under
investigation for his "behind the scenes" agreement with Turkey and stood
accused of "lobbying for a foreign country without registering with the
Justice Department. ***hurryet claimed that the agreement had been
undertaken by President Ozal without approval from the Foreign Ministry.
Re****tedly Perle would receive $875,000 for his services. The paper quoted
him as saying, "I'll be a consultant. I'll run the works. By running it
behind the scenes, I can be more useful for Turkey." International
Advisors
(LAI), as the firm would be called, includes Douglas Feith, Mark Feldman
and
Michael Mobbs, men with former White House, Defense and State Department
jobs. In the agreement Perle's name did not appear. (***huriyet 1.24.89)
Ufuk Guldemir, the paper's Wa****ngton correspondent, issued another re****t
claiming that a "warmer atmosphere" had developed after Perle and his
group
met with Turkish officials in the U.S.. One target of its efforts would be
the conservative wing of the Congress, another to strengthen Turkey's
sales
to the Defense Department. According to Guldemir, Turkish of ficials were
heartened by the "ability of this team to influence the strong Jewish
lobby
in the United States." (***huriyet 1.25.89)
The Financial Times of London printed further details of the Perle-Turkey
deal. Feith, of the law firm of Feith and Zell, would be the firm's
chairman. (In 1982Feith resigned from his White House post because of
alleged involvement with Israel.) Papers signed by Sukru Elekdag and Feith
indicate that the "sole function" of the new company would be "to serve
the
Turkish embassy in its lobbying operations in the U.S." The paper called
the
fact that Turkey would be IAI's only client "highly unusual." (FT 2.4.89)
When the Wall Street Joumal re****ted Turkish press claims that Perle "sold
the idea for the new company to Turgut ozal," Perle was vehement in his
denials. "I am not representing Turkey in any way whatsoever," he
countered.
"I find very distasteful this business where people leave the government
and
the next thing you know, they're on the other side of the table
negotiating
with the U.S." (WSJ 2.16.89)
Denials aside, this Milliyet re****t outlining his firm's work clearly
challenges his veracity: "Speaking of the firm he established to do
publicity, Perle described the spheres of activityin which IAI will be
involved: to encourage Americans, especially members of Congress, to visit
Turkey; to assure that even if aid to Turkey is not increased, all
Turkey's
debt will be converted to grants; to end the 10-7 ratio of military aid
between Greece and Turkey; to pursue joint Turkish American production and
investments; on publicity, to fLx a general strategy and plan; to
influence
American public opinion on Cyprus and the Ar- menian question. (Milliyet
2.25.89)
TheFinancial Times called Perle's connections with the Israeli arms
industry
"well known" and noted that he has encouraged "discrete negotiations"
between the Turkish military and Israeli companies. In his Pentagon job
Perle oversaw military policy and security assistance to U.S. allies and
championed in- creased aid for Turkey. (In 1988 Turkey received $623
million
in U.S. military assistance, ranking it third behind Israel which received
$3 billion and Egypt $2 billion.) One Senate official said that there will
be tough resistance if Turkey tries to in- crease textile ex****ts to the
United States. He complained that American jobs are being lost in his
state
because of "dumping" of Turkish textiles. American companies are also on
the
alert and have said that if IAI tries to obtain U .S . military technology
for Turkish companies, they will go to Congress to fight to keep their
domestic and foreign markets from being undercut by the Turks. (FT
2.20.89)
On March 10 ***hunyet announced that Morris Amitay, former of ficer of the
America Israel Political Action Commit- tee (AIPAC), a powerful lobby
group
in Wa****ngton, would join the Board of Advisors of Perle's firm. (See
Legal
Emes 3.20.89)
Two months later the Turkish daily re****ted that IAI had passed its "first
test" by helping to defeat a proposal to maintain the 10-7 ratio of
foreign
aid as the standard on grants and FMS credits to Greece and Turkey. The
paper credited Perle's firm with the defeat.(***huriyet 4.21.89)
Under the cir***stances, it is not surprising that when Perle appears on
U.S. television or when he writes, he is identified simply as a "former
Assistant Secretary of Defense" with no reference whatever to his 1irkey
and
Israel connections.
The Uses of Academe
The Turkish-Jewish alliance operates in other arenas as well. In 1987 an
academic conference was convened at Brandeis University on May 10- 12,1987
on Jews in the Ottoman Empire . The gathering included a round table
discussion of plans to commemorate Turkish tolerance.
In 1988 Ye****va University hosted another conference co- sponsored by the
B'nai Brith Anti Defamation League and the Federation of Turkish American
Societies on the topic of "Turks and Jews: 500 Years of Shared History."
The
Turkish press made it quite clear that this conference and other such
activities were designed to recruit the sup****t of the so-called 'Jewish
lobby." (Azbarez 3.12.88)
Even the Jewish Museum held a fundraising masked ball with the theme 'In
the
Court of the Sultan' to herald an exhibit on the Sephardic Jews in the
Ottoman Empire. (NYT 3.11.90)
The Price Israel Pays
Early in the century when Theodore Hertzl sought to secure land in
Palestine, he offered Sultan Abdul Hamid his influence with the European
press to dissipate the unfavorable image of the Ottomans vis a vis the
Armenian massacres. (Azbarez 8.1.87) If subsequent history is any
indication, the offer still stands. Even Jews who emigrated from Turkey to
Israel are recruited to counter Armenian claims. In 1987, they protested
the
introduction of the question of the Armenian Genocide in the European
Parliament's Political Commission and the U.S.Congress. The Turkish-Jewish
Association of Israel ad- dressed letters of protest to both bodies
insisting that "no minority in Turkey is denied any and all rights enjoyed
by all Turkish citizens." (***huriyet 4.22.87)
In 1987 Israel's Foreign Ministry pressured the Israel Broad- casting
Authority to censure a TV do***entary with a segment on massacres of
Armenians. In 1990, the Authority banned the showing of the film "Journey
to
Armenia" a do***entary draw- ing heavily on the Armenian genocide. The
cancellation came as a result of Turkey's Chief Rabbi and the Turkish Jews
in Israel who said the screening aroused fears among Jews living in Turkey
and might harm Israel-Turkey relations. (AzMarez 4.20.90)
Thanks to the efforts of LAPID, a Jewish movement focused on calling
attention to the lessons of the Holocaust, the film was premiered in
Jerusalem.(Armenian Weekly 7.21.90)
With the help of Jews abroad, the Israeli government downplays or
completely
obscures any news that might cast a pall over relations with Turkey. In
1987
when President Kenan Evren spoke to the Fifth ICO Summit in Kuwait, he
referred to his country's defense of the Islamic cause and the Palestinian
people who were deprived "of their legitimate and inalienable rights." Not
only did Evren reaffirm Turkey's "profound spiritual ties with the Islamic
countries and peoples of the region" but he noted its role in preserving
the
Islamic and Arabic identity of Jerusalem, and sup****t for the Arabs and
Palestinians. "Turkey," he said, "is convinced that unless the legitimate
rights of the Palestinian people, who have for years been crushed and
subjected to injustice, are recognized, a just and lasting peace cannot be
achieved in the Middle East. Evren also recognized the PLO as the
legitimate
representative of the Palestinians condemning Israel for "its attempts to
change the demographic structure of the occupied territories, and its
policy
of force. We use every op****tunity to denounce such actions on the part of
Israel, " he said. (Ankara Domestic Ser- vice, Turkish 1.27.87, Inter-Arab
Affairs 2.3.87) Evren's words precipitated no reaction from Jewish
journalists in the U.S. Nor did they denounce Turkey for championing
Palestinians while oppressing Kurds.
Noting differingJewish perspectives on Israel-llurkeyrelations writer
Titos
Leonidas explains that one camp sees Turkey as non-Arab Muslim and
therefore
a bulwark against Arabs. Leonidas sees proponents of this position as
public
of ficials in key administrative positions, universities, think tanks and
public relations. They wish to arm Turkey and to justify its value. In the
other camp are those who remember their past and are reluctant to promote
Turkey's position. (National Jewish Daily2.23.87) Yohannan Ramati, a
lecturer on interna- tional affairs for the Israel Foreign Ministry, takes
a
different view, arguing both Turkey's and Israel's im****tance in the fu-
ture configuration of the Gulf. "Turkey is threatened - political- ly,
economically, and military," he wrote. "The political danger is the
outgrowth of incitement and terror fanned from outside. It has two
sources:
the Islamic revival and radical terrorism." (Midstream June/July 1982)
Ramati made no mention whatever of Turkey's internal policy of repression
of
the Kurds. Nor could Ramati have foreseen that ten years later Turkey
would
have been given hegemony over the Middle East thus larvelv dimini****ng
Israel's position.
In 1989 the long arm of the Israel government reached Capitol Hill
(October
23, 1989) to press influential American Jewish organizations to lobby
against a Senate resolution proclaiming a national day of remembrance for
victims of the Armenian 'genocide."'As a people which was itself a victims
of genocide, we feel natural sympathy for the Armenians. But Israel wants
to
foster its relations with Turkey, which it views with great im****tance,"
sources said, insisting that their names and those of their organizations
be
withheld. According to the New York Emes one major organization had
actually
prepared a release sup****ting the resolution but it was killed at the last
minute. (NYT 10.23.89)
Turkey's Jews
In the aftermath of the Istanbul synagogue massacre, a flurry of articles
on
Turkey's Jews appeared. One Jewish businessman told the Jewish Exponent,
"Life is good for the Jews here." But like many of those interviewed, he
asked that his name be withheld. "The Turks may not love us, but they
leave
us alone." he said.
The Exponent's Lisa Hostein noted a "gnawing sensation felt by an American
visitor that the Jews here are constantly retreating, hiding or halting
conversations that dwell on Jewish issues." This she terms "a
well-accepted
fact of life for those who call Turkey home. From the carpet doctor who
covers his mezuzah to the husband who asked his wife to lower her voice
while discussing Jewish matters at a public restaurant, being Jewish in
Thrkey is strictly a private matter, an observer soon learns." (JE
6.23.89)
Another member of the Istanbul community told her, "In Turkey you can't be
a
Kurd and a good Turk. But we want to depict the image that you can be a
Jew
and a good Turk. We can only do that by living with certain conditions."
On
freedom of speech, a shopkeeper said, "We aren't able to say everything we
want, but then again, neither is anyone in Turkey." Said another, "Turkey
is
a democracy on paper, but the civil and individual rights are not the same
as we know them in the Western world."(Jewish Exponent 6.23.89)
According to New York Emes correspondent Marvine Howe, "While there are
nodiscriminatorylaws againstJewishcitizens, in practice they cannot reach
the top in administration, the professions or the armed forces..." (NYT
9.7.86) But Henry Siegman, a member of the AJC delegation who attended the
funeral of Jews massacred in Istanbul, spoke of the community as
"prosperous
and proud" of their origins and insisted "that security and human rights
had
improved vastly in Turkey in recent years..." (Jewish Exponent 6.30.89)
Relations between Turks and Jews are continually rationalized along the
lines of this New York Emes re****t, "Although it is surrounded by Arab and
Moslem states and 99 percent of its people are Moslems, Turkey was one of
the first states in the region to recognize Israel... The Israeli flag
flies
openly over its consulate in Ankara, the capital, and Turkey, whose 22,000
Jews have been relatively well treated over the centuries, has open, but
low-key commercial and tourist exchanges with Is- rael. There are also
im****tant but unpublicized forms of cooperation between the countries.
Turkish and Israeli police and intelligence agents, for example, often
work
closely together." (NYT 1.4.87)
The Ottoman Census of 1912 indicates that in Anatolia alone there were
80,000 Jews, not to mention those in Istanbul and Smyrna. Large numbers of
Jews emigrated from Turkey after World War I. Wlth the establishment of
the
state of Israel about 48,000 lower and lower-middle class Jews left the
country. Upper middle class and wealthy Jews stayed, most in Istanbul. The
Jewish community now numbers less than one tenth of what it was at the
turn
of the century. Which raises the question, if life is so good in lirkey,
why
did so many leave?
Sadly, those few who remain (estimates range from 18,000- 22,000) serve a
purpose far larger than their numbers. Through them, Turks can twist the
arms of Jews overseas. This is also the case with Armenians and Greeks who
remain. The Greek community in the country has shrunk from about 110,000
at
the time of the Lausanne Treaty in 1923 to about 2,500 today. It has been
described as "dwindling, elderly, and frightened." A mis- sion from
Helsinki
Watch visited Turkey in October 1991 and found that the Ankara government
continues to harrass them in violation of international human rights laws
and standards endorsed by the Turkish government. ("Denying Human Rights
and
Ethnic Identity: The Greeks of nlrkeg') Like the Jews in Istanbul, Greeks
who spoke with Helsinki Watch were fearful of being overheard or observed.
Like the Jews, they keep a low profile.(Azbarez 8.15.92)
A number of Jews from Turkey have emigrated to the U.S. Hostein says that
some who have been approached by Turkish officials "expressed discomfort
at
being put in the position of defending the killing of Armenians...." One
communal leader put it this way: "We are not defending the
Turks...whatever
happened between the Turks and Armenians is not our busi- ness." (Jewish
Exponent 6.23.89)
"They were good to us," says Istanbul's Chief Rabbi David Asseo. "It is
necessary to let the world know that lirks have always been a tolerant
nation...to let the world know of our comfortable lives in Turkey, we will
celebrate a 500th anniver- sary." And President of Istanbul's Jewish
Association, Jak Veyisid relayed his pride in announcing to the world the"
mag nanimity that was shown towards Jews 500 years ago and which continues
today." Behcet Turman, General Secretary for the Endowment to sup****t the
commemoration, goes even fur- ther: "In a manner not seen anywhere else in
the world, people of other races and religions have been living together
for
hundreds of years without problems or incidents. This should be made
known."(Milliyet 8.3.89)
Anti-Semitism in Turkey
Major Jewish organizations vigilant about exposing anti-Semi- tic episodes
around the world have been reticent about calling attention to
anti-Semitism
in Turkey. In 1988 Mayor Halil Celik, in a protest against what he termed
"Israel's oppressive behavior against the Palestinian people," invited PLO
leader Yasir Arafat and Abu Firas to demonstrate in Sanliurfa. Celik then
went on to say, "I want to put flowers on Hitler's grave who sent the
Jewish
people to soap factories because what he did was much too little. Nations
that scream human rights if they can't equal Hitler, shame on them....From
the moment of birth, from their mothers, Israelis who have been
innoculated
with hatred of Muslims are now oppressing a handful of Palestinians who
have
rebelled. The Israeli nation is consuming the product of the American
people
and throwing up on the oppressed Muslims. If I could, I would bury the
Israeli society in the center of the Harran plains, just like radioactive
tea. Let them see how one struggles against oppression, how human rights
are
defended." (***huriyet 2.28.88)
Later interviewed by Ozcan Ercan of Milliyet, Celik elaborated "Look, our
greatest enemy is Zionism. And I am Jews' greatest enemy...against those
who
are doing those things to our brother Palestinians, I can't behave in any
other way. Today, if there is a state governed by religion, it is with the
Jews." Ercan then asked, "Is this the source of your admiration for
Hitler"?
"Yes," the Mayor replied. "I put flowers at the factory where he made soap
out of Jews in Belgium. I wish Hitler had eradicated them all." Asked if
such statements might negatively impact on San- liurfa, Mayor Celik
answered, "Those who occupy the govern- ing offices, people who serve the
state, their thinking is identical to ours. It is not necessary to name
them. It may harm them. I can only state that all in the highlest levels
of
bureaucracy are our close fricnds." (Milliyet 5.14.89)
Five days later, Istanbul's Chief Rabbi Asseo responded: "The mass murder
of
6 million civilian Jews; children, youth, the aged because of their
religion
during World War II by a psychotic leader, represents a very sad
memory...To
admire this greatest tragedy of human history and its primary actor
Hitler,
not to memorialize the innocents and the crematoria, but to venerate the
murderers by placing flowers on their graves is behavior of a kind that is
incomprehensible to the human concience regardless of religion, politics
or
social vicws. The words used by Ibrahim Halil Celik...have pained the
hearts
of Turkish Jews who have lived as brothers in great tolerance in this land
for 500 years and who have acknowledged this at every op****tunity."
(***huriyet, May 19, 1989) But Celik never apologized nor retracted his
remarks, nor did the Ankara government condemn his statements. Nor did
Jewish organizations tell the Jewish community in the United States what
transpired in Turkey.
When Kurt Waldheim made an official visit to Turkey, Nazi hunter Beate
Klarsfeld, Rabbi Abraham Weiss of the River- dale Institute Synagoguc and
Solomon Elijasher flew to Ankara to protest. They were harrassed and even
assaulted. Rabbi Weiss complained to the US Consulate. But the only
comment
from Turkey's President Evren was that the Waldheim visit was
"satisfactory." (11.88)
In July of 1992 Chaim Herzog, the first president of Israel to visit
Turkey,
participated in ceremonies marking the 500th an- niversary of the
expulsion
from Spain. Hundreds of demonstrators chanted "Down with Israel! Down with
America! Intifada until Israel is wiped out" and "Jew Go Home!" Theyburned
U.S. and Israeli flags. Riot police did not intervene. Rocks shattered the
windows of the El Al of fice in midtown Istanbul. When Herzog spoke to the
congregation of Neve Shalom where the symagogue massacre took place, he
praised Israel-Turkish relations and said they would become even stronger.
(Reuters7.17.92) Instead of exposingthisseamy side of Turkey, leaders of
the
Jewish community limited their sights to preparations for
commemoratinzTurkish "tolerance."
"In Turkey you can't be a Kurd and a good Turk. But we want to depict the
image that you can be a Jew and a good Turk." member of the Istanbul
Jewish
community
Kurds: Use 'em or Lose 'em
Divided first in the 17th century and again in our own, Kurds struggling
to
control their lands and destiny have long been vulnerable to the service
of
alien agendas. In the aftermath of World War II, the Soviets backed the
tiny
Kurdish Republic of Mahabad in Iran - until they closed a deal for an oil
pipeline with the Teheran Government. The Republic fell in little less
than
a year; its leaders were hung in the town square. In the early 1970's the
Nixon-Kissinger Administration armed Iraqi Kurdish guerrillas because the
Shah of Iran wanted to bring Saddam Hussein to the bargaining table over
the
Shatt al Arab. When the deal was cut, aid to the Iraqi Kurds was abruptly
severed. The revolution led by General Barzani ended tragi- cally in 1975.
During the Iran-Iraq war some five years latcr, both countries sup****ted
Kurdish guerrillas in revolt across their borders while theywarred on
Kurdish opposition within. The latest Gulf episode represents the most
insidious use of Kurds to date, for Iraqi Kurds were seduced into a deal
with the Turkish government that would culminate in what may bc one of the
darkest episode in the Kurdish history of this cen- tury. Israel and its
Jewish sup****ters in the United States would play a role in promoting
Turkey's Kurdish azenda.
In line with U.S. policy Israel trained and advised Iraqi Kurds during thc
Barzani revolution, but their sup****t ended when the State Department so
decreed. Prior to Iraqi chemical at- tacks on Iraqi Kurds in Halabja in
1988, there was no active Israeli sup****t for Kurds anywhere, except for
media and press efforts to draw comparisons between Iraqi Kurds
"willingness" to accept "autonomyH and Palestinian refusal to do so.
Moreover media and print was designed to attack Arab "hypocracy" for
sup****ting Palestinian national rights while repressing those of the
Kurds.
Ironically, promoting Iraqi Kurds as victims while covering Turkey's
Kurdish
repression is hardly the basis from toclaim the moral high ground.
No single Jewish writer has done more to pursue this agenda than pundit
Wllliam Safire. In a series of passionate and poig- nant essays spanning
over 15 years, Safire has yet to devote a single piece of writing to the
struggle of 15 million Kurds in Turkey. What is most troubling to me as a
Jew is that the plight of fifteen million Kurds in Turkey most closely
parallels the plight of Jews throughout centuries. For unlike the Iraqi
Kurds who have always been at liberty to be Kurds, those in Turkey were
ruthlessly legislated out of their ethnic identity and have remained so
for
more than sixty years. In 1925 the right to be Kurdish was banned, the
most
minute infraction of this prohibition severely punished. I remember
opening
the New York Times on my 51st birthday, March 27, 1981, to read that
former
cabinet minister Serafettin Elci had just been sen- tenced to two years
and
three months at hard labor in Turkey. His crime? He said in public, "I am
a
Kurd. There are Kurds in Turkey." But no one, Jews included, wanted to
hear
about Kurds in Turkey.
Neither William Safire nor A. H. Rosenthal have committed passion or pen
toTurkey's Kurdish policy.. What Safire has done is to skirt the broad
issue
only to land on the Iraqi Kurd- Palestinian equation. Take for example
this
1979 piece: "Drafts of resolutions blow through the halls of the United
Nations in New York, presaging the establishment of a separate state for a
new "people" called the Palestinians, while no voice is raised in that
entire establishment for the legitimate rights of an an- cient people now
being denied by Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Syria." "the Kurds are not talking
of
"self-determination," though that was what they were promised at the
Treaty
of Sevres in 1920. Nationood is too wild a dream; all they want is the
right
to live - as Kurds - under whatever flag happens to be flying overhead.
They
seek autonomy, not sovereignty. They want to be let alone, to have their
culture respected. That reasonable quest has provoked the greatest series
of
hypocrisies in the world today...In their travels in the Middle East, men
like Harold Saunders, Andrew Young and Jesse Jackson might ask their hosts
the Kurdish question: Why do national leaders who loud- ly demand a
sovereign state for the PLO ruthlessly - and now bloodthirstily - suppress
the legitimate rights of autonomy of an ancient people on their own
territory?" (The Tennessean 9.24.79)
Writers in Israel tend to follow the same path. In an article printed in
the
Jewish Journal on October 12, 1979, Fred Ehrman, Chairman of the UOJCA
Israel Commission writes: "When the Kurds rebelled in quest of their
rights
of autonomy in their homeland, they were repeatedly and ruthlessly sup-
pressed. Yet the world remains silent. Why is their quest for autonomy and
"self determination" of no concern to the moral leaders who clamor for the
"rights" of PLO murderers? Ehrman also makes passing reference to Turkey,
but merelyas one of the countries that rule Kurds.
In the wake of Halabja, Iraqi Kurds sought to contact Israelis on the
assumption that gas attacks reflect the Jewish past. PUK leader Jalal
Talabani asked this writer to do so. If the following is fact, Talabani
succeeded in making his own con- nections. A re****t from Abu Dhabi radio
indicated that there were indeed meetings in "occupied Palestine" between
Kurdish leaders and Ezer Weizman, Za'aqov Tzur, Gid'on Pat, and Moshe
Arens
to coordinate a media plan linking killing by gas of Jews to allegations
against Iraq as the focus of a media campaign -against Iraq.
(FBIS-NES-88-183 9.21.88, p. 14)
Beyond the rhetoric of condemnation which gained momen- tum with worldwide
revulsion over chemical weapons use, nothing was done to prevent the final
offensive of Saddam Hussein on the heels of his ceasefire with Iran. And
so
five months after Halabja, in the Emal week of August, Iraqi forces
attacked
the Kurds and sent more than one hundred thousand into flight across the
border into Turkey.
In the Israeli press Turkey was showered with praise for its
"humanitarian"
act in admitting the fleeing Iraqi Kurds. There was however a story behind
the story, a tale obscured in brief phrases beneath headlines that misled
American readers. U.S. complicity with Turkey effectively stymied the
admission of legitimate humanitarian aid organizations. But this fact
never
did become an issue in the U.S. press. Ankara denied symptoms of the use
of
poison gas by Iraq, refused to designate the refugees as such, and
deliberately kept the International Committee of the Red Cross and the UN
High Commission for Refugces at bay. Three of this writer's letters on the
topic were published in the New Yotk Emes (10.30.88; 4.15.89; 11.22.89).
One
argued that thc title "humanitarian" was not applicable to the Turks.
International aid for the refugees was funneled en- tirely through the
Turkish Red Crescent in spite of the fact that Turkey's Kurds complained
bitterly that during a 1983 earthquake in the Kurdish region, out of
millions in foreign assistance, most Kurds received not so much as a
blanket. Yet there was no criticism of Turkey by members of the Jewish
community here or in Israel. Nor was there a hint of protest over Turkey's
subsequent treatment of these Iraqi Kurds. The choice was no choice.
Weighed
against Israel's relations with Turkey, Iraqi Kurds didn't stand a chance.
Until nearly three years later when they could be used to press the common
agen- da of the West, Israel and Turkey in the Gulf crisis.
In the first exodus of 1988, the Israeli government did offer to admit
some
200 Kurdish orphans. The Jerusalem Post printed one refugee's response.
Interviewed in Turkey by Yehuda Litani, he had this to say, "We all
remember
how the late Barzani felt towards you, his admiration for everything that
had to do with Israel. And now we hear that you are ready to let in 200
Kurdish orphans. What is 200 children compared to the m***** of people
here
in the camps? " The first thing you can do is take in some thousands of
refugees like you took in the Kurdish Jews." (Jcrusalem Post 10.15.88) But
Israel never offered to take in all refugees. In fact, several Jewish
activists contacted the Kurdish Library suggesting that 300 Kurdish
peshmerga from the camps might be admitted to Israel to be stationed on
the
Golan Heights presumably to help defend Israelis against Syrians.
In the wake of the 1988 exodus, Jenzsalem Post writer, Yosef Goell took a
pragmatic approach to justify the concern of Jews for Kurds: "I would say
first and foremost that it is in Israel's interest to sup****t the Kurdish
movement as consistently as possible, and not only by offering to take in
and care for 200 Kurdish refugee children, although that is a laudably
humane undertaking...The essential interest that we share with the Kurds,
and with other non-Arab peoples in the region, is an insistence that the
region is not a "pure Arab sea" but that there must be room in it for the
independence or broad-scope ethnic autonomy of Moslem, but non-Arab Kurds;
of Arab but non- Moslem Lebanese; of Egyptian Christian Copts; of non-Arab
non-Moslem Sudanese Christians and so-called animists; and yes, of Jewish
Israelis...When I see Westerners and Israelis who have fallen under the
spell of Palestinian propaganda with its 'inalienable rights of the
Palestinian people to national self determination, I try to subject them
to
the acid test of their attitude to Kurdish national independence. If, as
is
usual, they have never heard of it or couldn't care less - like the
Palestinians themselves who do not possess a micron of empathy for the
cause
of Jewish, Kurdish or anyone else's nationa1 inde- pendence - I write them
off as victims of a passing chicwho are coming into the court of world
opinion with unclean hands." (The Forward 10.7.88)
Taking advantage of the unfolding drama, the Jewish Com- munity Council of
Greater Wa****ngton disseminated an Israel Fact Sheet captioned, "The
Kurds,
A Test of Arab Veracity" which made these points: "One reasonable
evaluation
of Arab intentions toward Israel is how religiously and politically dif-
ferent groups are treated within Arab societies and how Arab governments
provide for human and political rights for in- digenous minorities."
Citing
Iraqi references to Kurdistan as a "Second Israel" and Kurds as
"Zionists,"
it follows the usual vein: "Arabs demand of Israel the same rights that
the
Kurds seek from Iraq....Iraq's response to Kurdish attempts to foster an
independent, secular democratic state must weigh heavily in Israel's
evaluation of similar rhetoric from the Arab world ahout Palestinian
rights." (No. 1. Sept. 1988)
Israeli writers by and large made the same argument pressed through the
sieve of righteous indignation over suffering Iraqi Kurds, and assiduously
avoided Turkey's neglect of those in refugee camps. Because the
"Intifadah"
was fast becoming Israel's major headache, Ofra Benjio of Tel Aviv
University indicted Western media for ignoring the "Intifada in Iraq."
(Ha'arets 9.5.88) Countering criticism of Israel's handling of the
Palestinian uprising, Shmuel Schnitzer played the same tune. "I've been
waiting and waiting for the reaction of the enlightened, and not so
enlightened world to the war of Iraq on its Kurdish population," he wrote.
"And I'm still waiting. I've been waiting for media coverage of the sort
that informed the coverage of the uprising of the Palestinian hoodlums
against Israeli soldiers. for the tidal wave of disguest and moral out
rage,
like the one that has inundated us for the past nine months....the West
has
accorded recognition of the right to national self-determination for the
Palestinian people...But it is not prepared to accord similar recognition
to
the rights of an ancient people such as the Kurds." Schnitzer then
proceeds
to indict what he terms the "defective operation of the European
conscience." "Theywill not remain silent in the face of evil; but they
will
carefully select between the evils which they will per- mit to excite
their
indignation and those which will leave them in cold indifference.. .An
Arab
held in administrative detention will drive them out of their minds. A
Palestinian rabble rouser who will be taken to the border for de****tation
will arouse deep feelings of identification. But two thousand dead Kurds
or
a hundred thousand Kurds expelled from Iraq to Turkeywill not make them
lose
a minute's sleep...The whole world knows that a campaign of genocide is
going on in northern Iraq. But the victims are Kurds. And the Kurds don't
exist as a nation and don't have a right to such an existcnce according to
a
world in which justice is weighed by false measures." (Ma'ariv 9.16.88)
Nowhere among all these polemics was Turkegs Kur- dish polic.y even
mentioned.
Kurdish Jews in Israel are used to reinforce of ficial themes. In a re****t
titled "The Kurdish Way" Pamela Kidron noted that "reaffirming friendly
relations with Moslem Kurds" has been among the reasons behind the
Saharani,
the Kurdish festival of Kurdish Jews in Israel. "In Kurdistan the local
Agha
would send his guards to watch over the campsite at night and protect the
emptyJewish houses in town. This time, the Jewish Kurds are watching out
for
the Moslem Kurds."
Even after Halabia and the August 1988 exodus into Turkey, sup****ters of
Israel continued their condemnation of Iraq couched in terms of sympathy
for
the suffering Iraqi Kurds. But nothingwas forthcoming on the plight of
five
times as many Kurds fighting for their rights in Turkey.
On September 23 Ufuk Guldemir, ***huriyet's Wa****ngton correspondent,
wrote
an article captioned "Israel's Shadow on the Kurdish Question." Here are
excerpts: "Israel's role in the Kurdish question, while quiet, is active
and
palpable in the U .S . capital. "... joint efforts by the directors of an
organization called the Kurdish Program [established by this writer in
1981]
which arranged Talabani's visit to the U.S., and the directors of the
Helsinki Watch Committees, who have written very critical- ly on the
Kurdish
question, and Israel, because of their blood ties it is possible to state
"On Kurdish issues, there is an Israeli dimension... Kurdish leader
JalalTalabani came to the US with the assistance of the Israeli lobby, his
visit was made possible by an organization called the Kurdish Program
based
in New York, whose directors have blood ties with Israel." The article
also
charges that "Israel" reminded Turkey of "the Kirkuk mat- ter." It was in
fact this writer who raised the issue of Turkey's spurious claims to the
oilfields in northern Iraq in a letter printed in the Baltimore Sun
(11.11.86). The letter contested Turkey's "historical claim to the region"
arguing that if conquest is a legitimate basis for claim, the West should
be
prepared to return all of the Ottoman conquests including Jerusalem and
the
Balkans to lirkey. The AJC's George Gruen actually ar- gued in sup****t of
Turkey's claim. (Newsday 1.21.91). In 1989 when the Kurdish Library
mounted
a photographic exhibition in the Cannon Rotunda on Capitol Hill,
***huriyet
re****ted that the Turkish Foreign Ministry was investigating. Ministry
spokesman Murat Sungur told the press that the meeting was "a creation of
a
new element from the U.S." A Congressional Human Rights Caucus briefing in
which this writer participated precipitated this comment from Sungur:
"Vera
Sacedpour who is renowned for being an enemy of Turkey, who in a sense has
made a reputation by working against the unity of Turkey's lands, will
speak
at this meet- ing..."(***huriyet 10.26.89)
Who cares about the Kurds?
When Iraq invaded Kuwait, Israel and Turkey called for a first strike to
wipe out Saddam Hussein's armed forces. (Wa****ngton Times 8.31.90) Among
the
first to call for "humanitarian intervention" to save the Iraqi Kurds was
none other than Richard Perle. Because his work for Turkey was never
mentioned in his public appearances, he was able to play asignificantrole
as
an"objectiveexpert" servingbothIsrael and lbrkey during the Gulf crisis:
for
Israel because war would destroy its major Arab adversary; for Turkey
because a decimated Iraq would facilitate Turkish ascendancy in the post
war
Gulf. In aNew York Emes Op Ed which identified him only as a "resident
scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and Assistant Secretary of
Defense in the Reagan Administration," Perle argued against continued
reliance on sanctions and in favor of air strikes to destroy Iraq's
military
capability. (NYT 9.23.90)
Even before the January 16th ultimatum, the Emes re****ted that a Committee
for Peace and Security in the Gulf had been established with Perle playing
a
leading role. The new commit- tee urged Administration elimination of
Iraq's
military capability as "an explicit goal" of American policy and warned
against an objective limited to expelling Iraq from Kuwait. (NYT 12.10.90)
Shortly thereafter, the group took a full page ad in the Emes in sup****t
of
the UN decision to "reject an outcome where Saddam withdraws from Kuwait"
and went on to argue that "Even if Saddam Hussein agrees towithdraw from
Kuwait, the threat posed by his weapons of mass destruction requires that
they be verifiably dismantled - or, if necessary destroyed." Acknowledging
that a military solution would "regrettably result in casualties," the
group
chided Bush for making "Iraq's unconditional withdrawal from Kuwait our
principal objective...We believe that we must also find ways to remove
Saddam Hussein's capacity to wage aggression, which now includes chemical
and biological weapons and may soon include nuclear weapons as well." The
nuclear theme would continue to play out through the ensuing months. Not
surpris- ingly, the group claimed that if Saddam won, the stage would be
set
for another Arab-Israeli war. Signatories to the ad in- cluded Douglas
Feith, Richard Perle and Stephen Solarz.
Solarz led the House of Representatives in promoting the war, submitting a
resolution to approve use of military force. Brooklyn Congressman Major
Owens said of the Solarz resolution, "The way the resolution was worded
made
it totalitarian and anti-Democratic. Instead of giving us two resolutions
-
one in sup****t of troops in the field and a separate one to approve the
president's performance - they insisted on putting them together." The
Solarz strategy was apparently to frame the resolution so that a vote
against the resolution would appear to be a vote against sup****ting
American
troops. Owens was among those who believed that economic sanctions were
working and that a peaceful solution should be sought. Rlit Salarz and the
State Denartment prevailed.
Many in the Christian community took exception. For ex- ample, Rev. Finley
Schaef said, "We say woe to you who send your men and women to war" as he
looked to the U.S. to serve as the world's "moral example." (Park Slope
Paper 1.25.91) Nor did Solarz' Israel connection go unnoted. An editorial
in
the Park Slope Paperhad this to say, "Solarz, a leading Congres- sional
sup****ter of Israel whose district is home to a large number of Jewish
voters, said his position "went way beyond" using force to protect Israel,
although protecting Israel was an "additional reasonH for sup****ting
military action. "If Israel didn't exist, I would have taken exactly the
same position," Solarz told re****ters. What he didn't say was that his
decisions were as much carrots to his Turkish constituents. On the other
hand, Congressman Charles Schumer, also Jewish, saw force only as a last
resort. Exchanges on Capitol Hill were heated. Arguing against the Solarz
resolution on the House floor, Owens said, "Once we have the US with a
great
occupying army in the Middle East, it will be hard for Arabs and Moslems
to
believe that we did not undertake a grand strategy to control the region
and
theywill accuse us of having plotted to dominate the Mideast militarily in
order to protect Israel." In 1992 Solarz himself became a casualty of
redistricting and lost his bid for re-election
Media and press on the Solarz side of the issue promoted the idea that it
was not Israel so much as the world that Saddam threatened. But not only
did
the war serve Israel's agenda, it worked to the benefit of Turkey, which
without firing a shot received forgiveness of a $7 billion debt, increased
im****ts of textiles to the U.S . and a host of other percs. The war
produced
an emasculated neighbor and proved to be a giant step on the ladder to
completion of Ankara's Kurdish agenda, the destruc- tion of the PKK.
Not surprisingly, the American Jewish Committee's George Gruen used Iraqi
Kurds as the springboard to make a case for Turkey's "claim" to northern
Iraq. In an article appearing in Newsday he argued that "When Britain
carved
up the Mideast, the Iraqis got an oil-rich Turkish province...In the
aftermath of the Persian Gulf war, the international community must begin
to
redress a historic injustice against Turkey and the Kurdish people
[meaning
Iraqi Kurds]...From the international legal and ethnic standpoint,
Turkey's
claim to Iraq's oil-rich north- ern province of Mosul is far stronger than
Baghdad's...Iraqi Kurds should be permitted to choose independence or
reunion with Turkey." (1.21.91) A virtually identical argument appeared
earlier in a letter published in the New York Emes of November 24, 1990.
Gruen thus opened the door to justify a Turkish claim to Israel. The
Ottomans conquered more than northern Iraq; they conquered the Balkans and
the entire Middle East right up to the borders of Iran. If conquest were
to
be accepted as legitimizing territorial claims, the Turks would have as
much
claim to Israel as to Iraq. If conquest is a legitimate basis for claim,
why
the demand that Saddam Hussein's forces evacuate Kuwait which Iraqi forces
conquered. Interestingly, both the Newsday article and the Emes letter
identified Gruen only as an adjunct professor of international affairs at
Columbia University. His role in the American Jewish Committee was never
mentioned.
In Israel there was unbounded praise for Turkeys role in the Gulf. Take
this
example by David Kushner of the Jerusalem Post: Erkegs performance during
the Gulf crisis has been received with a great deal of appreciation,
sometimes even amazement, by the Israeli public. Not only did Tbrkey
sup****t
the allied cause, but it appeared to be the most decisive and outspoken in
its reaction to Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait." Kushner noted that
only a few days before in an inter- view published in the Post nlrkey's
President Ozal had ex- pounded on "his vision of the new order in the
Middle
East in which Turkey could assist in solving the Arab-Israeli conflict and
help lead the area toward security and economic prosperity...What tipped
the
balance and placed Turkey solid- ly among the members of the coalition was
not only Turkey's traditional sup****t for legality and stability in
international relations, but its conviction that its interests lay with
the
Western countries." (Jerusalem Post 1.3.91)
Moreover the Post was among the first to take Ozal's word when he
announced
that he would go to the Parliament to lift the ban on speaking Kurdish in
public in Turkey. The Turkish Parliament didn't move until months later,
and
even then provided that the Kurdish language could be spoken in public,
but
only for "non-political communication." nPolitical" com- munication would
henceforth be punishable under new Anti- Terror Laws enacted at the same
time. This was of course not made known to readers of the Jenzsalem Post.
In
lbrkey, there never was a change of heart; there was simply a change of
tactics.
Among some Israelis, there was opposition to Saddam Hussein's removal. "We
are all with Saddam," one headline read. Labor dove Avraham Burg commented
that "in the present cir***stances Saddam Hussein is better than any al-
ternative." "a ****'ite empire" emanating from Iran could pose an even
greater threat to Israel. (Ha'aretz 3.29.91) Following the exodus of Iraqi
Kurds after the Gulf war, a re****t in the Jewish Press argued along
similar
lines that "..despite the sen- timents Israel feels for the Kurds, Israel
is
not expected to rush to intervene in the current uprising in northern
Iraq.
While the Kurdish rebellion is directed against the regime of Saddam
Hussein, which represents a danger to Israel's security, the Kurds are
working in coordination with the governments of Teheran and Damascus,
which
are trying to turn the Kurdish zone into a bridge between Iran and Syria.
Creating virtual territorial continuity between the two radical regimes by
means of a common Kurdish ally could constitute no less a danger to the
peace of the region and Israel's security than did the regime of Saddam.
Accordingly, with all sympathy for the persecuted Kurdish minority in Iraq
and all Israel's concern over the cruel measures the Iraqis are employing
against them, Israel must act not only out of sentiment, but also
according
to its own security needs." (Jewish Press 4.12.91)
The toll of Kurdish suffering in the Gulf war was far greater than the
press
or vested interests revealed. The embargo starved Kurds as well as Arabs.
Intense and massive coalition bombing raids killed thousands of Iraqi
Kurds
serving in Saddam's military. There is no ACLU, no "conscientious ob-
jector" status in Iraq. One serves - or else. But these realities escaped
the attention of the Western and the Israeli press.
In the U.S., the public's attention was directed down a well- trodden
path.
At the height of the exodus, A. H. Rosentha] penned an essay countering
Administration fears about Kur- dish aspirations with the usual
presumptions: "...the Kurds have said they will not demand independence.
They might jump at what the Israelis have offered Palestinians - elections
and substantial self government."(NYT 4.2.91) William Safire followed
suit.
"The way to give the Kurdish people the freedom they deserve is the same
way
to give Palestinian Arabs, includ- ing those driven from Kuwait, the
freedom
they deserve: create a new category of sovereignty. The Kurds seek what
Pales- tinian terrorcrats scorn: self-government, with cultural dignity
respected, within the borders of an existing state...the world bandied
about
is 'suzerainty,' which allows the encompassing state a sovereignty limited
to defense and central banking, while providing the inhabitants of a
region
with real autonomy and ethnic identity short of total independence." (NYT
4.15.92)
What is most disturbing in these writings is the presumption of these
pundits that they are privy to what Kurds want . True, Iraqi Kurdish
leaders
have for years indicated willingness to accept autonomy. But in twelve
years
of monitoring Kurdish issues on a daily basis, we have no indication
whatsoever that this is actually the case. We are persuaded that Iraqi
Kurds
have been schooled by their Western friends to tell the West what the West
wants to hear. Ironically, it has been the Kurdish armed op- position in
Turkey, the PKK - condemned as "Marxist terrorist" by Safire - who have
been
most forthcoming in expressing the Kurds' desire for an independent
greater
Kurdistan in the Mid- dle East. But like the countries that house Kurds
and
their Western allies, Israel and its sup****ters do not want to hear that
Kurdish demands parallel those of Palestinians. Our 1991 study of Kurdish
aspirations revealed that an independent greater Kurdistan is the ultimate
goal of virtually all Kurds. (See Summary of Results, Kurdish Life, No. 2,
Spring 1992)
Throughout the Gulf crisis and to this day, Rosenthal and Safire have
continued to hammer away at Iraq with not so much as a good word for the
beleaguered Kurds in Turkey, a conflict that escalated at an alarming pace
particularly since the instal- lation of the coalition's Hprotective"
umbrella for Iraqi Kurds only. Nothingwaswritten exposingthe
dealbetweenPresident Ozal and Iraqi Kurdish leaders Masoud Barzani and
Jalal
Talabani. Ozal proposed a federated Iraq in the Fall of 1990, the north
for
the Kurds, the mid-section for the Turkmen of Iraq and leftovers for the
Arabs. In return Iraqi Kurds were to "secure" their border against Kurdish
guerrillas from Turkey. Less than two years later, this rapprochment
culminated in Kurds killing Kurds when on October 4, 1992, in
collaboration
with the Turkish military, Iraqi Kurds attacked their kinsmen.
In fact, a Safire essay only a week before the outbreak of the October
joint
offensive against the PKK urges the Administra- tion to "persuade" Turkey
to
join the U.S. in recognizing and supplying food and arms to the
"democratically elected government" of Iraqi Kurdistan in return for its
"curbing Kur- dish agitation within Turkey." To call the guerrilla war of
Kurds in Turkey "agitation" is to call the L.A. riots a shouting match.
Kurds inTurkeywere so crushedbythelate 30's thattheycould not lift their
heads, no less their arms until 1984. Since then over 5,000 people died,
2,000 in 1992 alone. Their struggle is defamed, ignored, distorted and
manipulated by the Western powers and a Western press. Safire's most
recent
New YorAc 7-mes essay runs the same gauntlet. Minimizing the population of
Kurds in Turkey and exaggerating the numbers in Iraq he argues for U.S.
foreign assistance of $150 million to "democratic" Iraqi Kurds who
apparently earned this reward in large part for "cooperating with Turkey."
As Safire put it, "Pesh Merga fighters behind Masoud Barzani successfully
took on the Marxist terrorist Kurds." (NewYorkTimes 5.13.93)
While Israel benefits from Iraq's destruction as an Arab power, its
relations with Turkeymayverywellbe detrimental to Israel's future. Beyond
peace and security, arid Israel needs water. ****mon Peres and Turgut Ozal
already discussed a plan to get water to Israel by creating a pipeline
from
Turkey traversing Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Peres was right when he
ar- gued that "the next war in the Middle East could well be over water,
not
land, and Turkey is the only land in the region with excess water.
(Jerusalem Post 4.28.91) Not surprisingly, the AJC's George Gruen with a
grant from the U.S. Institute of Peace, an organization established and
funded by Congress, is now studying Turkey's water resources. But the
water
that Israel seeks originates in the Kurdish region of Turkey - a region
that
yearns to be free, a region Israel and the West are helping Turkey to
keep.
Yet in the wake of the Gulf war the Anti Defamation League of B'nai B'rith
bought a full page ad in the New York Nunes. The League's solicitation for
funds for Iraqi Kurds was headlined, "Who cares ahout the Kurds? We do "
"My faiture to stop the destruction of the Armenians had made Turkeyforme
a
place of horror, and If oundintolerable my further daily association with
men who, however gra cious and accommodating and good-natured they might
have been to the American Ambassador, were still reeking with the blood of
nearly a million human beings." Henry Morgenthau, U.S. Arnbassador to
Turkey
(1913-1916)
"A good deed is its own reward"
Like the late Henry Morgenthau, himselfaJew, todaythereare Jews both in
Israel and in the US who vehemently oppose compromising positions.
Unfortunately, most members of the Jewish community here and abroad are
not
privy to what goes on behind the scenes. When they do become aware, many
are
outraged. In fact, the advocacy of the Fresno Jews and Rabbi Kenneth Segel
of Temple Beth Israel prompted the convention of the Union of American
Hebrew Congregations to pass a resolution in sup****t of the Armenians.
Rabbi
Segel defended his position as "the right thing to do." (Azbarez 2.2.89)
At
an event in his honor, he told guests, "If they can denyyour history, they
can deny ours..a good deed is its own reward." (Azbarez 1.25.89)
Others complain that Israel's official position is shameful and flies in
the
face of a Jewish ethos. Gershon Gorenbert, editor for the Jetxusalem Post
wrote that his first impression on reading that Israeli diplomats and
American Jewish lobbyists had op- posed a resolution to commemorate the
Armenian genocide was that the source must have made a mistake. "Israeli
diplomats were asking senators to forget the massacre so that a minor
matter
of genocide would't upset relations with Turkey." Gorenbert too alludes to
two schools of Jewish thought. The first: "As victims of the ultimate
crime,
the Jews are owed a huge moral debt by the rest of the world, but our only
obligation is to protect ourselves. The second school maintains that on
the
moral level what makes the Nazis' action a crime is not that the victims
were Jews, but that they were people. Read that way, our history tells
Jews
that we have a special duty to speak out against any act of genocide,
whoever the victims may be." (Armenian Re****ter 11.9.89)
Yosi Sarid, a member of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee
put it this way: "Jews who lost six million of their people in the horror
of
the Nazi genocide should be the last to join in denying the existence of
another genocide." Sarid complained that this wasn't the first time Israel
sup****tedTurkey's positions to improve relations. Now diplomatic sources
hoped that despite the failure of Israeli diplomats and Jewish lobbyists
to
block the Armenian Genocide resolution in the U.S. Congress, Turkey would
ap- preciate Israel's contribution and move to restore full diplomatic
relations. "There is hardly a single outrage this government is not
willing
to commit under the pretense of a narrow-minded national interest which is
bound to prove counterproductive," Sarid told Ha'aretz..
Needless to say, if history is a guide, like human rights, morality is the
servant of geopolitics. In one sense, Israel's policy towards Kurds in
Turkey is even less excusable than its manipulation of Kurds in Iraq if
only
because the situation of the Kurds in Turkey most closely reflects Jewish
history. Ironi- cally, it was the demand that Jews accept Catholicism that
precipitated the Inquisition that drove Jews into the arms of the Ottoman
Turks five hundred years ago. For more than sixty years in Turkey, it has
been precisely those Kurds who insisted on retaining their identity who
suffered most.
In recent months Turkey has given Israel's sup****ters in the U.S. a second
test. And that is promoting American intervention in Bosnia as a "moral
imperative." Never in history an independent state, Bosnia was simply an
administrative district under Ottoman rule and later under Tito. Nor has
Bosnia anything like a homogeneous population. Yet geopolitical interests,
not morality, legitimized and recognized Bosnia and must bear
responsibility
for the ensuing tragedy. Such political status has never been promoted for
Kurds in Turkey - over seven times the population of Bosnia - by
sup****ters
of Israel. It is preciselythis selective treatment that maywellcausefuture
demands by Jews on Kurds and on the moral conscience of the world to fall
on
deaf ears. As Kurds in TurkeyKain more atten tion - and this will surely
come to pass - they will point an accusing finger. Complicity with Turkey
can only generate anti-Israel sentiments among 25 million Kurds of the
Middle East. For in the final analysis, Kurds will ultimately align with
Kurds. And this maywell have far-reaching implications in the region. What
matters outside is what an already cynical world will believe when history
writes the record.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vera Beaudin Saeedpour. Director of Research
Number 6, Spring 1993
A publication of the Center for Research, the Kurdish Library, 345 Park
Place, Brookl yn, New York 11238.. Tel 718-783-7930 Fax 718-3984365
|
