Canada fails to recognize the Genocide

[Boghos]

Genocide bill before Canadian Parliament debated but defeated by one NO Vote

 

Armenian News Network / Groong

June 1, 2001

 

Special eyewitness report

By Antoine Terjanian

 

OTTAWA, CANADA

 

 

M-285 is a law proposed by Canadian MP Sarkis Assadourian for the

official recognition of the Armenian Genocide by Canada's Parliament

(and Government). If approved, the bill would have become law.

 

The motion was presented by Sarkis Assadourian at 13:30 hours today

and seconded by Ms. Augustine (Etobicoke-Lakeshore, Liberal Party),

while the 'Members' Gallery was filled with Armenian supporters.

 

Ambassador Papian sat with the Armenian supporters instead of his

reserved 'diplomatic area'. As promised, Assadourian first recognized

the Armenian supporters, the Armenian Cultural Association of Ottawa

and Ambassador Papian in the Gallery, as well as Ambassador Ogut of

Turkey, who was sitting in the diplomatic gallery. After presenting a

good historical background on Armenia, Assadourian received unanimous

consent from the House to table important documentation on the

recognition of the Armenian Genocide in other countries and

International Institutions. He then had a choice of either designating

the motion as votable, or asking again for unanimous consent of the

House. He chose the latter. Everyone in the House shouted their

consent, except for one MP dressed in pink, who came for a few moments

only to register her dissent, did not take a seat at her usual desk

and left immediately afterwards. The bill was therefore defeated and

withdrawn from the orders papers, however, six more MPs spoke to the

bill till the House adjourned at 14:30. The whole thing was broadcast

live with the title: Armenian Genocide motion.

 

Gurmant Grewal (Burnaby, Canadian Alliance - former Reform Party) said

he had received representations on the issue from the Armenian

Community as well as from the Canadian Turkish Associations, and used

up his time mainly to take shots at previous Liberal and Conservative

governments for what they did to other ethnic minorities in Canada.

 

Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval, Bloc Quebecois) gave an excellent,

well documented presentation in support of the motion. Bill Blaikie

(Winnipeg, NDP) also gave a well documented refutal of Turkey's

arguments and challenged them to recognize the Genocide themselves,

lest they felt some solidarity with Ottoman deeds, and were thus still

implicated.

 

Bill Casey (Cumberland, Progressive Conservative) also gave a well

thought presentation in favor of the bill. Gar Knuston (London,

Liberal governing majority) read again the statement made by Canada's

Foreign Minister's Parliamentary Secretary who in 1999 described the

tragedy as a 'premeditated act to eradicate a minority within a

country' and expressed hope that peace would prevail in the region,

and denounced such acts of barbarism and inhumanity towards fellow

humans. Ken Epp (Alberta, Canadian Alliance - former Reform Party)

spoke in support of the bill, and related how his own family was

murdered by armed gangs (of Bolsheviks) in his Grandmother's 'old

country' (Ukraine??), and also condemned all such acts.

 

Sarkis Assadourian concluded by thanking all those who participated in

the debate, while regretting that it did not lead to the conclusion he

was aiming for, he vowed to continue the struggle, for 'although the

Armenian people are prepared to forgive and make peace, forgiving has

no meaning unless the offender expresses regrets on past deeds and

asks for forgiveness'.

 

The full edited record will be published by Hansard and will be

available on Canada's Parliamentary website tomorrow.

[nairakev]

Hi beau gosse!

You do some fitness here. Big mussles.

 

I'm glad you brought in Canada. It's time to talk as well about this "North-american" princess, flirting with the whole world.

 

In many online discussions I had the occasion to talk to canadians (non-armenians, of course). They always like underlining their difference and originality in comparisons with the US mainland socio-political picture.

 

I can't figure out their position. On this issue with the Armenian Genocide Recognition. Does Canada wait for the US or for the Great Britain?

 

 

France did recognise, as Italy, Greece, Sweden, Belgium, European Parliament, Vatican and Argentina.

 

So who Canada is waiting for? Is that Turkey? Disgusting scenario in that case!

 

[ June 02, 2001: Message edited by: naira ]

[Boghos]

Canada is a member of this community of "gentle" nations, of which the Scandinavian countries used to be part, ad now apparently only Sweden insists in being seen as such.

 

This has been quite useful in the international scene as it helped them advance their economic agenda as well. Even though these countries corporations and sometimes even governmnents acted in avery similar fashion to their big brothers USofA and Great Britain, they were never perceived as "imperialists".

 

I am not saying that these countries,two of which I have been a frequent visitor and even temporary resident, are exactly the same as Big Satan. Far from that. But they are not saints either.

[nairakev]

Well said, Beau gosse!

You lived in Canada right?

So what is the difference between Canadians and Americans, I never couldn't figure out that? Are they different: like the French and the Brittish, Or the Germans and The Italians...

What's that canadian difference, in reality?

[Boghos]

My dear Naira,

 

It is always difficult to answer these types of questions because they involve sweeping generalizations. I think Canada can be divided in at least five different components: Québec, Western Canada ex-British Columbia, British Columbia, Eastern Canada and indian population/northern Canada (mindo you there ara aboriginals all over the place bu in my view they share a lot of political similarities).

 

Western Canada is not very different from what the Americans call the Midwest, hard working hillbilies. Québec is Qúebec, the Quiet Revolution being a very important but seldom refered to period. Eastern Canada is Ontario, a sort of small NY state. BC is an interesting plavce, the original population is a mix of Anglophiles and California style dudes, it has seen also a very strong Oriental immigration wave over the years; Indians or Native Canadians, are just that, I will not go deeper into this topic because thre is enough controversy already and it is no interesting from my point of view.

 

So, that would mean that we would have to create stereotypes for Americans as well.That would take too much time, and would probably be very boring in any case.

 

I think Canadians are sufficiently different from Americans.They are usually more conservative, more reserved. After all Canada was initilly settled by people running away from the Republican movemment in the US and as Richler puts is by the ssum of France (as Australia in relation to Britain), Etc.

 

Whatever, have a drink on me.

[MJ]

I wonder if it is easier to have the Genocide recognized by all the major countries of the world - one at a time, or working directly with Turkey, and bypassing the long list of world parliaments?

 

After all, even if all the countries of the world recognize it, we still would need Turkey to do so, wouldn't we?

[THOTH]

MJ - I see it this way - Turkey is not recognizing the Genocide - so Armenians in the Diaspora must work to obtain recognition elsewhere. This both puts some pressure on Turkey (and makes Turkey look pretty lame when they attempt to counter as they do) and it keeps the issue alive - which is in itself important I think. If Turkey recognized the genocide there would be no reason for anyone else to - would there?

 

Obviously, at some point, the Turks must recognize the genocide and condemn the CUP. Is your question more properly regarding where and how we (in the Diaspora) should best expend our energies? Or will this track really ever get us anywhere - because it is basically only confrontational toward Turkey (and fuels the counter movement in Turkey and with Turks abroad etc) and is in some ways not very effective (as these resolutions are feel good but don't really do anything..no boycotts or such etc or plan of action). Another issue, of course, is that there are those in the Diaspora heirarchy (Church and lobbying organizations & elsewhere) whose positions, whose power base as it weere, revolves around perpetuation of this issue - being at odds with Turkey and rallying around (and even profiting from) "Genocide"...what is their incentive to do anything but the same and would/could they necessarily do otherwise? What can and should Diaspora Armenians do diffrently - in your opinion?

[nairakev]

OK, Beau gosse!
You have it.

[nairakev]

I don't think that the whole point should turn arround recognistion of Genocide by Turkey.
If tomorrow Turkey will recognise the Armenian Genocide it will be most likely easily stored in national "black list" of undesired events and it will stimulate certainly some breakthrough for Turkish intelligentsia to handle more let's say 'dared issues' like human rights nad ethnicand religious tolerance.
No doubt it will be a huge benefit for Turkey, since it's preparing its application file for EU membership.

But on the other hand, I think that the Armenian diaspora will loose its identity and get assimilated within 30 years by worldwide process called in the US "melting pot".

I really do not intend to dramatisize the assimilation issue. I'm taking a more distant position to what's ethnic identity should be. Often it goes in contradiction with the whole concept of "armenian" ethnic identity.

I think the recognition of Armenian Genocide by each country can bring a new way of thinking about the whole human community.
We should use this movement ot bring new ideas for the rest of the world. We cannot just be siatisfied by the idea of simple recognition of a murder.

We should analyse the reason of that murder. And offer our remedy to human society.

I raised this issue in many other threads. I'm not going to repeat myself by bringing on the agenda the whole concept again. I think our Genocide recognition movement should force the UN and other international organisations to review the Genocide convention. A serious re-edition should be made. There is a serious lack in UN convention. The social group is not listed among genocide's target groups. That's a huge issue to discuss and promote. If we want the international community appreciate our movement, we should push the Armenian government, propose a brand new text of UN convention of Genocide.

Armenian government actually should add two topics on this issues:

1. The Recognition of Armenian Genocide by the UNO (there were some attempts by Armenian representation, but without serious efforts, let's be honest)

2. Re-edition of the actual text of UN convention.
(We should add just one word and if needed make some more additional lines of explanation.) This word should be the word "social".

I explain my point, if you are not bored up.

The artcile 2 in this treaty says:

Article 2
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;

( Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

© Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.


This is actually a good text, but uncomplete. The most important target group is missing. Guess which one! This group concerns each individuality on this earth. You, me, and those who are planned for birth! If we do not protect our individuality, there always will be genocides based on national, religious, ethnical and racial intolerance.

The line from article 2 should be modified but this modification is a whole issue of many intellectual battles. But no matter how opinions split this proposition should be made by armenian government.

Here is the original line:
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: and now how it will look like when the line is modified:
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a social, national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:


I'm quiet confident that many of you understand what such a proposition may intend. Social group apart is an independent group. And I think it is one the most important target groups for genocide, since it may unite representatives of any national, ethnical, racial or religious group.

It targets an individual directly. In the future the social group (criminals in prisons, gay and lesbians, dissident intellectuals, political oponents of worldwide totalitarist organisations, women, HIV positives) may become the more sophisticated target for extermination. The Armenian Genocide Recognition movement is not only a movements of idealists, revengers and armenians, but also a way to prevent it in future.

Armenian state as a member of UNO, and as a country who have signed the Genocide Treaty has the legitimate right ot put on UN agenda some modifications to the text. It is claimed in the treaty itself:
A request for the revision of the present Convention may be made at any time by any Contracting Party by means of a notification in writing addressed to the Secretary-General. (an extract from article 15)

--------
the url to original UN 1948 Genocide Treaty text http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/p_genoci.htm

[MJ]

Yes, TOOTH. Pretty much this is what I meant.

I think Diaspora has to have a different strategy. One has to estimate where does the current strategy, even under the scenario of success lead us, and then decide whether it is the most rational way to get there.

I think the issue has to be taken directly with the Turkish side. After all, all the recognitions of the Genocide by all the parliaments of the world so far (and I suspect in the future) are of only declarative character, as the very UN Resolution of Genocide is.

With all this said, until there is a different strategy in place (if ever), I would support the old one, but would advocate revision of strategy.

[ June 03, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

[THOTH]

Naira - all very good points - and I understand where you are going with the socialissue (of course by this definition genocides are occuring pretty much in every nation to some degree at nearly all times...can you really expect a body of Governments to act against itself?) - however I think that you are perhaps expecting to much (particulalry within this [Armenian genocide]context). Armenia/Armenians are not (yet?) significant enough to force anyone (UN) to do much of anything (I mean look at our less then stellar sucess thus far in general...and we are dealing with what should be pretty obvious...no?).

 

Also - this is an issue of the past sure - as it is unrecognized - and Armenians keep the issue alive - it is current - but only in a partial context. For the most part the UN etc have more pressing current issues - I hardly think they will spend too much time worried about Armenian issues (Genocide) or even this social (ie wider) aspect that you mention. It is just not a fire so it can only garner so much attention. And as it is of nebulous nature it does not have a natural constituancy to press for such (the opposite in fact - as you are asking governments to basically condemn themselves)....etc (sorry to say such...as I certainly very much share/understand your concerns). Minorities and non-conformists are forever vulnerable I think...

 

Points concerning Genocide as rallying point for continued Armenian identity also very well taken. To some degree, perhaps, this issue is why i am involved at all, as I am more or less fully assimilated (though non-conformist/idependent minded etc) American (who refuses to be walking billborard for brand names & the like...etc)....

 

 

MJ - I understand as well. It is likely too much to hope for to think that Armenian (Diaspora) political leadership will change. The existance of Armenia provides another avenue of course...and oppurtunity...on a number of fronts...and we must wait and see as this temporary situation (Karabagh) winds out and, of course, a generational (& more) transition in Turkish leadership passes before we shall see what will come of the different perspective(s) and motivations. Additionaly, academia and media will play a role...and of course people such as ourselves...and the Ceyhuns, Filiz's and others of like mind. Time does not stand still. Precognition has never been proven accurate...we cannot predict our future..we can only act in the present (with perhaps an eye further...and hope...)

[nairakev]

Naira - all very good points - and I understand where you are going with the social issue (of course by this definition genocides are occuring pretty much in every nation to some degree at nearly all times...can you really expect a body of Governments to act against itself?) - however I think that you are perhaps expecting to much (particulalry within this [Armenian genocide]context). Armenia/Armenians are not (yet?) significant enough to force anyone (UN) to do much of anything (I mean look at our less then stellar sucess thus far in general...and we are dealing with what should be pretty obvious...no?).

 

THOTH,

I understand that this issue isn't a "hot" one. That's true that the UN agenda is quiet busy and there are many other urgent topics.

However, the UNO is a huge organisation, devided into dozens of specialised bodies (UNESCO, UNISEF, UNHCR etc.)

 

I know that if Armenian representation in the UN will propose the "Recognition of Armenian Genocide" along with a proposal to modify "Genocide Treaty of 1948" for UN agenda it will meet serious opposition from the UN hierarchy.

 

But that's not a problem. Each initiative meets hardships. There is always a resistance to any such initiative.

It will more likely take 10-15 years to get both ends meet each and seat arround a discussion table.

 

What I aware of, is that this initiative should be started today and it should be made by the Armenian respresetation.

 

If UN recognises the Armenian Genocide, it will opens many doors to whose who were considering themwelves unconcerned by Armenian cause. For example Humanitarian organisations, which have sometimes more weight than national governments.

 

I know it may sound rediculous, that Armenian representation makes such a weird proposal to modify UN convention on Genocide by adding the "social group" as another possible target for genocides.

Don't you think that most of ideas sound rediculous in the beginning.

 

Though the proposal by the Armenian representation of a such modification will be taken very seriously. First, Armenians are victims of Genocide, this is the first logical connection, secondly, this modification opens the door for the whole human society with its main social differences. Armenia does have them as well.

 

Having many friends who work in Humanitarian Organisations (such as MSF, Ligue des Droits de l'Homme, ActUp!, OMCT) I know that the social group is considered by them as one of the most crucials. There is already an underground movement, let's say there is an "embrio" of this idea, discussed widely in the Human Rights NGO's millieu. Many of guys that I met, told me that some algerian and even russian gays or transsexuals were refused to be recognised refugees, because of the UN convention refugees. There are many HIV positive refugees who arrive to Europe with hope to find peace, because in their countries they were exterminated by the parties involved in the civil wars. There are hundreads of movements on earth(which are not political, neither religious or ethnical) who got persecuted by local governments. In the future we can meet many phenomenons cultural and social, they will certainly become a target for extermination.

 

The Genocide convention will become a "Red book" of human races. We should seriously review this convention and propose significant modifications.

 

If Armenian representation in the UN will make such a proposal, many Human Rights NGO's will back this proposal. Many of these NGOs they have in some case significant power of influence as well.

 

I can imagine that this sounds a bit idealistic. But after all, is it important to care about being considered rediculous today, when it will help to prevent human tragedies in future. Besides it will be a contribution from the Armenian Genocide Recognition movement to enriching human rights experience for better coexistence.

[THOTH]

Naira - I would never wish to temper or squash in any way your idealism - the world need more like you - people who care. I am idealistic - but also realistic (and perhaps pessimistic) on things...what can I say?

 

The things you are advocating are good ideas - my "knocking" them does not mean that I do not support what you say - only that I have certain doubts due to my perceptions of how the world/these organizations work. Again, you are correct that such ideas may seem outlandish or unachievable - but you never know - reality can change - and suddenly they are mainstream or somehow enacted - so do not give up.

 

Again though - the UN has already soft peddled the Genocide issue. It has been recognized (Domino can precisely reference under what context) in a limited manner. However again, the UN is a highly political body - and the political actors are governments who will act in their own interests or for (odd) reasons. Any action must be taken using alliances or done at the right time - where perhaps some nations are upset at Turkey etc for other reasons ands are likely to support something seen as against it - etc ...this sort of thing. Also the various UN bodies of which you speak have very specific charters/missions (and tend to be more responsive to US interests then the body as a whole...thus US friend of Turkey...little/no action against it...sure some condemnation for human rights abuses etc - but where is the teeth in such? Santions, restrictions? no way...) Additionaly - Armenia is on shaky ground. Armenia rightly wants beneficial relations with Turkey and thus can only push the Genocide "thing" so far. So there are a number of factors. Granted, of course, we would all like to see recognition in the UN - but don't hold your breath. Sorry again for all of my pessimism...and again even so I like your ideas and your points regarding the social issues and disenfranchised people...etc...and linkage with Armenian Genocide experience. I think this is perhaps fruitful thinking and you never know, perhaps there is room for leverage here...

[nairakev]

THOTH,

bad boy, I'm gonna spank you, indeed!

[THOTH]

Hurt me, hurt me, harder, harder, yes mistress whatever you say, I can be good, really....etc...LOL

 

BTW was it something I said? (LOL) Or just general practice for us "bad" boys. whack whack whack etc.

 

I saw you & Thorny's comments concerning having guys under your control...I bet...(perhaps it is an angle for influencing the UN [predominantly men...no suprise eh?])

 

Back on topic (a bit more perhaps...sorry to [again] spoil the fun atmosphere) - one vote (a women as it turns out) killed this Canadian resolution. Does anyone have any detail on her motivation...etc?

[nairakev]

I'll return on a less serious atmosphere...I prefer, THOTH!

You are such a bad boy!...

But may be it is a serious consideration about the woman who cut the resolution.
The reason may be is in her being "malbaisée" as say French. Ask Domino he knows what does that mean...
I have already, a very bad reputation. I can't again launch myself in explanations which abuse the use of "foul" language.



BTW was it something I said? (LOL) Or just general practice for us "bad" boys.
You are smart enough to understand it, THOTH!


I saw you & Thorny's comments concerning having guys under your control...I bet...(perhaps it is an angle for influencing the UN [predominantly men...no suprise eh?])
I never use the sexual attraction for promoting my ideas ...never...THOTH.
I count on you to beleive me at least on this one!

[THOTH]

quote:

---

Originally posted by naira:

I have already, a very bad reputation. I can't again launch myself in explanations which abuse the use of "foul" language.

I never use the sexual attraction for promoting my ideas ...never...THOTH.
I count on you to beleive me at least on this one!

---

Understood (to both)...(and I do believe you)...you have no need here I think (though you gals do know the methods of making men agreeable, as it were...just fact)...(however)your insights speak for themselves....

[nairakev]

Thanks, THOTH!

You are such a bad boy!

Mmmm! Delicious!

[Paul bunyan]

IDENTITY OF CANADIAN MYSTERY WOMEN

does anyone know the identity of this individual who cast the deciding vote against the genocide recognition her

name should published so the people of her district can vote against her in

the next election