Bananas

I refer, of course, to the possibility of an Armenian resolution being passed by the American Congress.

I write this article while bleary-eyed with déjà vu. Not long after I started working at a Turkish newspaper, I recall the great brouhaha as Senator Robert Dole tried to move a resolution through the US Senate to declare April 24, 1990 “a national day of remembrance of the 75th anniversary of the Armenian genocide of 1915.” I also recall having to gently disillusion a colleague that organizing a boycott of Dole bananas would little affect the fortunes of the senator’s family who were humble people from Kansas.

The Dole-sponsored resolution was defeated by a filibuster on the Senate floor. Had it succeeded, would history have turned out differently? Well, for a start, we wouldn’t have to have had quite so many debates over the future of Turkish-American relations in the intervening years, and a lot of well-paid Washington lobbyists, working on Turkey’s behalf, might not have been able to pay off their second homes so quickly. Would Turgut Özal have been unable to pursue his “active foreign policy,” which included close logistic support for the first American invasion of Iraq? Perhaps.

But the invasion would have gone ahead in any case, and if 2003 is anything to judge by, Saddam Hussein would still have left Kuwait. But then if Turkish-American relations were strained during the 1990s, might the 2000-2001 economic crises have happened that much earlier (and at a lower cost) and might Turkey have been forced to undertake structural economic reforms that much sooner? Perhaps.

Speculating on historical “might-have-beens” is to engage in endless tongue-twisters. The more pressing question is: What might happen this time? Mehmet Ali Birand writes that Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül made a great impact during his recent trip to Washington and got to see Dick Cheney. The Financial Times writes that it was a complete disaster -- and that he didn’t get to see the new speaker of the house, Nancy Pelosi. The answer is: No one really knows.

The conventional wisdom is that the resolution has a better chance of passing than ever before, with the added push of the wave of sympathy and outrage that has flowed from the tragic death of Hrant Dink. Again, the wisdom is that if the motion reaches the floor of the House, it will pass -- but that it might just be strangled in committee.

I am the last person to ask what the future will bring. My record in predicting American politics is particularly poor. Up until the very week in 2003 when America invaded Iraq, I was still prophesying such a thing couldn’t possibly ever happen. “No one nation with so sophisticated an intelligence and foreign service at its disposal could be so daft,” I confidently told anyone who would stop to listen.

So if I don’t know what will happen, what do I think should happen?

There is little doubt that a resolution recognizing an “Armenian genocide” would at this moment throw oil upon the nationalist fires in Turkey. While they might not burn out of control, who can be sure of controlling the blaze? One could argue that the AK Party might deflect the blame for what in Turkey will be seen as a foreign policy disaster onto the ultranationalist right. I fear the opposite will happen and that a resolution will make a dialogue based on compassion more difficult. Sahin Alpay, a sensible commentator, writes that the resolution will only work to the advantage of those who want to see Turkey isolated.

My proposal, therefore, is simple. Instead of passing a resolution recognizing genocide, why don’t the wise American legislators pass a resolution declaring April 24 a day to honor the life of Hrant Dink and to reflect upon the cause for which he died: that Armenian and Turk might embrace each other with an understanding of each other’s history. I think if we start by mourning one man’s death properly, in time we will find a way to mourn the rest.