12 February 2007
H. RES. 106 FALSIFIES HISTORY;
MISREPRESENTS THE U.N. RECORDS;
PROFOUNDLY OFFENDS TURKEY, A STAUNCH U.S. ALLY;
DISCRIMINATES AGAINST TURKISH-AMERICANS;
HURTS AMERICAN INTERESTS IN A TRI-CONTINENTAL GEOGRAPHY LARGER THAN NORTH AMERICA;
ENDANGERS AMERICAN LIVES IN IRAQ;
PLACES LEGISLATURE IN PLACE OF JUDICIAL BRANCH;
CONTRAVENES U.S. FOREIGN POLICY;
PLACES LEGISLATURE IN PLACE OF HISTORY SCHOLARSHIP;
IT IS SELECTIVE MORALITY, DOUBLE STANDARDS, AND GREEDY POLITICS ALL ROLLED INTO ONE.
How can history be deliberately legislated to clash with truth ? And historical scholarship be disrespected and bypassed by our politicians? 
How can U.N. law be ignored and U.N. stand misrepresented? [2a] HR 160 claims UN to have adopted the Whitaker report accepting the genocide allegations. In reality, “…The (UN) Sub-Commission did not adopt the report, it was simply satisfied to take note of it... “ (i.e. a polite way of saying”No” in diplomacy to Armenian allegations.) Le Journal de Genève, “Une certaine reserve” (A certain reserve), October 14, 1985 [2b]
How can a staunch ally of the U.S. in the troubled Middle East be so unfairly and so unjustifiably offended just to appease a few vocal Armenian activists?  How can American interests be allowed to be held hostage to nagging, annoying, dishonest, and racist Armenian claims? Who is going to stop a few greedy politicians from destroying American interests in the name of getting re-elected?
How can a piece of legislation, even if it is a non-binding resolution, rammed though the U.S. Congress, knowing full well that its passage is will hurt the U.S. interests in a vast geography stretching from the Balkans to North Africa and form the Middle east to the Caucasus to Central Asia and beyond? 
How can any piece of legislation, even if it is a non-binding resolution, be so far off the American values like fairness, truth, freedom of speech, and more?
How can a non-binding resolution contain all these errors, omissions, insults, disrespect, abuse, and more in one simple text? 
It can if you let the Armenians write it and some politicians place Armenian interests before American interests. Sad but true.
H. Res. 106 ignores most experts on the Ottoman Empire who reject the Armenian allegation of genocide. It attempts to place, without constitutional authority or justification, the legislature in the seat of the judicial branch, by passing judgment on a controversial piece of history and unfairly defames an entire people on discredited evidence on a crime defined by international treaty.
H. Res. 106 also seeks to place, without constitutional authority or justification, legislature in the seat of the executive branch my dictating U.S. foreign policy, which up to now, carefully avoided such biased and bigoted approaches not to offend allies and encourage research, dialogue, and debate. US State Department, for example, openly supported Turkey’s 2005 proposal to Armenia to establish a joint commission to research and sort out this matter.
H. Res. 106 is blatantly anti-Turkish, as well as anti-Muslim, and threatens to undermine U.S. national security interests in a vast geography stretching from Southeast Europe to Caucasus to Central Asia and from the Middle East to North Africa. At a time when we need all the new friends we can make over there, now we will be losing old friends? After all, it is impossible and unrealistic, to expect from any country after the U.S. Congress chooses to dish out on them, against all good advice and warning, one of the gravest insults there is just to appease local politics, not to be shocked, outraged, even incensed. In this day and age of instant communication and dissemination, the old adage “All politics is local” seems woefully inadequate and misleading. Congressmen like Schiff, Pallone, Knollenberg, and Radanovich, therefore, can no longer hide behind this obsolete adage to hurl irresponsible insults to staunch U.S. allies for the appeasement of few of their vocal Armenian constituents. Maybe such selfish, ignorant, and gung-ho politicians should be recalled or voted out of office for the sake of national interests. Or better yet, send them to Iraq so they can see the young lives they are gambling with for their own selfish interests with their stupid, ignorant, racist, and dishonest resolution. Fail to see the connection? Try this: If Turkey is flabbergasted by the passage of HR 106 and closes down in retaliation the Incirlik US Base providing logistical and tactical support to US Iraq campaigns, the net effect would be increased risk for Americans in Iraq. Cannot these congressmen see this? What is “local” about their politics now may I ask? Do these congressmen even care?
Are you a concerned American? Do you wonder what you can do to stop this “freight train of a resolution” from crashing into the very strategic Turkish-US alliance and destroy long the term friendly relations? Then there is you can do. Some with a few simple clicks, others with a few well placed phone calls…Here are just a few of the actions you can take right now:
1- You can sign a petition so succinctly and wonderfully worded by the Turkish-Americans of Massachusetts simply by clicking below :
View Current Signatures
2- You can also send a fax to your representative, thanks to the Turkish American Heritage Political Action Committee, simply by clicking below  :
3- You can write, call your elected officials. You will find plenty of sample letters below.
4- You can write to media letters or op-eds.
Together, we can stop this racist, dishonest, and defamatory resolution, penned by the Armenian lobby, and pushed through the U.S. Congress by a small group of anti-Turkish bigots!
PLEASE ACT NOW!
 Four letters follow:
(Letter 1: sent before the infamous resolution was officially submitted)
Dear Congressman Calvert,
As one of your constituents, I wish you all the best in your challenging responsibility. On behalf of all my Turkish American friends in your district, I respectfully request that you do not approve so-called Armenian Genocide resolution to appease a group of vocal Armenians. Here are the reasons for opposing the Armenian resolution:
Turkish-Americans believe that it is historians, not Congress people, who should decide what happened in a distant continent so many years ago. In 2005 Turkish Prime Minister proposed a joint commission of historians be established to study the facts based on the archives of many nations. The Armenians rejected the proposal, preferred to push through a one sided legislations through their contacts. If Congress passes such a Turk-bashing resolution, it will greatly upset Turkish Americans and negatively impact US-Turkish relationship in a most critical time when we need to preserve and strengthen our global relations for our national interests.
We, the Turkish-Americans, sincerely believe that Congress action on so called Armenian genocide will not change the historical facts but can create undesirable and possibly unintended consequences in international relations among the Turkey, the U.S. and Armenia. We need to build bridges of understanding to lead us toward unity rather than aggravate polarization and division with racist resolutions.
Sincerely, Ergun Kirlikovali, (address & phone)
Letter 2: (Sent after the infamous resolution was submitted)
Please withdraw your co-sponsorship of H Res 106; it is based on racist and dishonest history.
Dear Congressman Calvert
As a Turkish American in your district, I am disappointed that you cosponsored H. Res. 106, (“Resolution”) that defines the killings of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire during the WWI period as genocide. The Resolution, initiated by Congressmen Adam Schiff, Frank Pallone, George Radanovich, and Joe Knollenberg, is one sided and will damage U.S. interests in the region
While the initiators of the Resolution portray their position as undisputed and non-controversial, nothing can be further from the truth. The vast majority of historians who believe that the Armenian case is genocide are not experts on Ottoman history or are of Armenian origin. In contrast, the vast majority of historians who reject the Armenian claim are indeed experts on the Ottoman Empire, such as Bernard Lewis, Pierre Oberling, Dankwart Rostow, Stanford Shaw, Justin McCarthy, Norman Stone, Guenther Lewy, Heath Lowry, and Avigdor Levy. They attribute the deaths to war conditions, which were aggravated by the Armenian Independence Movement and Revolt of 1885-1919.
Secondly, by ignoring the more than 1.1 million Muslims who perished in eastern Anatolia under the same conditions of war that effected the Armenians, and branding them as perpetrators of genocide and their children and grandchildren as deniers of genocide by legislative fiat, is an unfortunate example of history by legislation, not scholarship and, therefore, clearly un-American.
Combined, the adoption of one side of the story and this discriminatory treatment of Turks and Muslims, undermines U.S.-Turkish relations as well as U.S. efforts to demonstrate fairness toward and acceptance of Muslims. No time is a good time for bad resolutions, but such a resolution at this time is very harmful.
Genocide is a legal term that defines a set of acts supported by specific intent to destroy a race, religion, or ethnic group, “as such.” Only a “competent tribunal” can reach such a verdict after “due process”. There was no such court verdict in the Turkish-Armenian case (such as Nuremberg) and the legislature is certainly not the forum in which nations, peoples and persons are prosecuted and crimes adjudicated. The U.S. Constitution designates the judicial branch for this purpose. The 1948 Genocide Convention designates the International Court of Justice and the domestic courts of party states for this purpose. Prior legal forums, such as the 1919 Malta Tribunals and the 1986 U.N. Sub-Commission on Human Rights, all rejected that the deaths of Armenians constituted systematic killings by the central government. Much of the evidence in these forums, including the U.S. Records, was deemed unworthy of serious consideration. Interestingly, it is this very evidence that the proponents of the Resolution continue to regurgitate.
As you can understand, this Resolution violates fundamental American principals of fairness and due process toward Turkish Americans, people of Turkish origin, and Turkey. It prejudices future legal proceedings. It undermines U.S. and Turkish efforts to bring Armenia to the table for open dialogue and research into all aspects of the matter, including the Armenian Independence Movement and Revolt, 1885-1919. This foreign policy supports legal and historical research, per the 2005 proposal of Turkish Prime Ministry and Turkish Parliament to establish a joint Turkish-Armenian group consisting of historians and other experts from the two countries, which yet has to be accepted by Armenia.
Enactment of H Res 106 is bad policy based on bad history. I congratulate your colleague Rep. Bobby Jindal for withdrawing his name from co-sponsorship upon realizing the virulently anti-Turkish and anti-Muslim biased nature of H. Res. 106. I urge you to reconsider your position on H Res 106 and withdraw your co-sponsorship.
Sincerely, Ergun Kirlikovali, (address & phone)
Letter 3: Sent as letters to the editors to various media
Genocide Allegation is Based On Racist and Dishonest History
Armenian characterization of Turkish-Armenian conflict during WWI as genocide is racist because it ignores much larger Turkish dead and suffering. It is also dishonest because it dismisses the well-documented facts that the Ottoman-Armenians resorted to agitation, terrorism, armed revolts, and supreme treason (as they literally joined an invading enemy army to slaughter their own Ottoman-Muslim neighbors), in that order, from 1887 to 1919.
I am an American of Turkish descent, one of the eight children of a sole Turkish survivor of the Turkish village of Kirlikova. The entire population of Kirlikova was annihilated by Ottoman-Christians. We still don’t know where our grandparents are buried. You can guess how I feel every time I see those “Armenian survivors” on TV and newspaper columns bad mouthing my grandparents.
Turks lost 2.5 million souls during WWI alone, 523,000 thousand of them at the hands of the Armenian nationalists. Yet, due to endless, senseless, and baseless Armenian propaganda that saturated the West since 1915, Turkish side of the story was never heard, Turkish pain never felt, an Turkish tears never noticed. Bogus genocide claim dastardly camouflages those Armenian crimes along with their Turkish victims and adds insult to injury.
Turks were never heard on this issue. A court decision like Nuremberg does not exist. Until a verdict of genocide can be reached by a “competent tribunal” after “due process” where both sides of the conflict are properly represented and evidence cross examined, the term genocide should be preceded by the qualifier "alleged". That’s the American way.
Peace, Ergun Kirlikovali, (address & phone)
Letter 4 Posted at Los Angeles Times, Opinion:
VERDICT WITHOUT DUE PROCESS EQUALS LYNCHING
HR 106 is based and on an illegal footing. Let me lay it out as plainly as possible:
1- Genocide is a legal, technical term precisely defined by the UN. 1948 convention. Like all proper laws, it is not retroactive.
2- Genocide verdict can only be given by a "competent court" after "due process" where both sides are properly represented and evidence cross examined.
3- Such a "competent court" was never convened in the case of Turkish-Armenian conflict and a genocide verdict does not exist.
(The 1915 Ottoman courts martial punishing its own for abusing relocation orders prove that Ottomans did not wish to eradicate Armenians, but simply move them. Furthermore, 1919-1921 attempt to try Ottoman leaders by the British crown court ended up failure as no evidence that could stand the "scrutiny of a court" was found. 1920 Kangaroo courts of occupied Istanbul was a sham where hearsay and newspaper articles were admitted into evidence without allowing the accused to cross examine them. The latter was settling of the scores under the watchful eyes of the British occupiers. So, out of theree attempts at trials, two clearly disprove Armenian allegations while the third one is nothing more than a lynch mob cloaked as judges and prosecutors.)
4- Genocide claim is political, not historical or factual. It seems to reflect little more than possible Western bias against Muslims in general and Turks in particular. The term genocide must be used with the qualifier “alleged”, if one values truth, objectivity, and fairness, since no court verdict exists.
5- Genocide claim is based on racist and dishonest history. Racist because it ignores the much larger Turkish suffering with higher death toll, while it honors only Armenian dead and suffering. Dishonest because it dismisses Armenian brutal armed revolts, domestic and international Armenian terrorism, and supreme treason that caused their temporary wartime resettlement in another part of the Ottoman Empire (hence cannot be considered a deportation.)
6- Recognizing Armenian claim as genocide will profoundly insult Turks around the globe and derail the excellent relations currently enjoyed between the U.S. and Turkey. It will please Armenia, no doubt, but outrage Turkey, America's close ally since Korean War. Turks stood shoulder to shoulder with Americans in Gulf War, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, and Afghanistan. American gratitude and thanks will appear to come in the form of the worst insult that can be dished out to an entire nation after the worst injury suffered by the Turkish nation during WWI. Please remember that when President Clinton addressed the Turkish parliament in 1999, he got a standing ovation for the Turkish representatives. Turks did not change since then; but it seems Americans have. (The unpopular Iraq war shoved down the throats of unwilling Turks -- as well as most Americans-- may be at three root of some of this change.)
7- History is not a matter of "conviction, popular belief, consensus, media frenzy, or political resolutions". History is a matter of research, peer review, thoughtful exchange, informed debate, and objective, calm, and honest scholarship. Even historians, by definition, cannot decide on a genocide verdict, which is reserved for a "competent court" with its "legal experts" engaged in a proper "due process."
8- What we see today amounts to "lynching of the Turks" by Armenians (and their allies) to satisfy their age old hate for all things Turkish. American values like fairness, presumption of innocence until proven guilty, objectivity, freedom of speech, and promotion of peace are sadly stumped under the Armenian feet. Outraging one of America’s closest allies in the troubled Middle East in order to appease Armenians is not helping American interests.
9- Hate-based unfair and racist resolutions were never a basis upon which to bases American policy and conduct American business. Why start now?
Anyone claiming genocide based on the much discredited Armenian evidence is engaging in "conviction and execution without due process".
And anyone not using the qualifier "alleged" before the term genocide is being subjective, unfair, and, frankly, dishonest.
Peace, Ergun Kirlikovali, (Address & phone)
Ergun KIRLIKOVALI email@example.com
[2a] “Paragraph 23 of the H.RES 106 distorts the UN documents” Friday, February 09, 2007. To read the original text, please click on:
I am reproducing it here for the reader’s convenience.
The text of the para . 23 of the H.RES.106 (states:)
(23) In August 1985, after extensive study and deliberation, the United Nations Sub Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities voted 14 to 1 to accept a report entitled `Study of the Question of the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide,' which stated `[t]he Nazi aberration has unfortunately not been the only case of genocide in the 20th century. Among other examples which can be cited as qualifying are . . . the Ottoman massacre of Armenians in 1915-1916. “
The statement of paragraph 23 of the H. RES 106 is a blunt distortion of the United Nations documents. .
Based on UN documents, the truth is as follows:
The Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities (PDPM) which met at the end of August 1985 in Geneva and discussed a Report entitled the "Review of further developments in fields with which the Sub-Commission has been concerned " did not approve the Report of the Special Rapporteur Mr. Whitaker
On the contrary the PDPM,
a) refused to receive this report by deleting the word "receive" from the draft Resolution ( Para.57 of the Document E/CN.4/1986/5-E/CN.4/Sub.2/1985/57.)
b) Took note of the report of the Special Rapporteur ( E/CN.4/1986/5 E/CN.4/Sub.2/1985/57 (page 99. para 1 of the Resolution)
c) added the following words to the draft Resolution to underline its disapproval : " Noting that divergent opinions have been expressed about the content and the recommendations of the report" ( Adopted by consensus : page 30. para 65 of the same document)
c) refused to transmit the report to the Human Rights Commission by voting against such a proposal (10 for, 6 against, 6 abstention -- page 30 and 31 ,para 56 and 66.of the same document)
d) deleted the words specifying the "quality of" the proposals ( 16 for, 0 against, 4 abstention--- page 30 , para. 58f of the same document)
e) to underline the existing controversy on the matter the following reserves were put forward (paragraphs 41 and 42 of the Report of the Sub Commission:) :
"Para 41 : ... Other participants estimated that the Special Rapporteur should have exclusively concentrated itself on the prevention of genocides in the future without mentioning the past events on which it is difficult, even impossible to investigate;" Para 42 . some participants maintained the view that the Armenian massacres were not sufficiently proved by the documents and certain elements of proof have been falsified....”
In diplomatic practices, wording like "refuse to receive" "take note" and "refuse to transmit the report to a higher body" means a "polite" refusal,
The vote taken by the PDPM Sub Commission on this matter (14 for, 1 against and 4 abstention) is not directed to the acceptance of the Report of Mr. Whitaker as alleged by the para 23. of the H.RES.106 . (See para. 67 of the above mentioned UN document). but to the approval of the amended Draft Resolution which refuses to receive and transmit the report to the Human Rights Committee.
The above mentioned records prove that the para. 23 of the H.RES.106 seriously distorts the UN documents in question .
Records of the Sub Committee :
With regard the so called Armenian genocide, several delegates underlined their disagreement concerning references made by the Rapporteur. (See the Document E/CN.4/Sub.2./1985/ SR.17, SR 18 and SR 19) to alleged genocide cases. Those delegates are : Mr. Bossuyt from Belgium, Mr. Gu Yijie from China, Mr. Mazilu from Romania, Mr. Khalifa from Egypt, Mr. Martinez Baez from Mexico, Mr.Sofinsky from the Soviet Union, Mr Al.Khasawneh from Jordan, Mr. Chowdhury from Bengladesh, Mr. Joinet from France and Mr. Crey from the United States.
Let us start with the delegate from the United States , Mr Carey, who speaking in French said :" It is certainly impossible to apply juridical norms retrospectively and in the future one should be extremely careful when using words qualifying such vigorous events. ...... Certainly there exists other persons that the Special Rapporteur should have consulted.... "With regard the footnotes to paragraphs 20 to 24 of the Report , Mr. Carey declared : "all the existing sources have not been taken into account and the matter has not been elaborated sufficiently in depth. ..... The question of genocide has not been elucidated sufficiently" . Mr. Carey added that "he was not in a position to approve any resolution on this issue".
( A propos des paragraphes 20 a 24 du rapport de M. Whitacker, M. Carey pense que le Rapporteur spécial aurait sans doute pu développer davantage les questions évoquées.....Certes il est impossible d'appliquer des normes juridiques rétroactiment..... Il existe certainement d'autres personnes que le Rapporteur spécial aurait pu consulter personnellement et qui aurait pu donner des renseignement utiles .....il reste que la question de génocide n'a pas encore été suffisamment élucidée et que M. Carey ne sera pas en mesure d'approuver une résolution queşconque sur le sujet" )
The statement of Mr. Joinet from France is also interesting to note : " The debate on Mr. Whitaker report is in fact a debate on history: The members of the Sub Commission do not possess enough competence to evaluate the facts cited by Mr. Whitaker. The real question this Sub Commission has to resolve is not the historical truth. .... With regard the massacres of the Armenians in 1915-1916, Mr. Joinet thinks that one should admit the existence of the massacres but also recognize that it is difficult to have a conviction on this matter. "
" M. Joinet: Le débat de fond suer le rapport de M. Whitacker est en faitg un débat sur l'Histoire. Les membres de la Sous-Commission ont-ils des élements d'appréciation suffisants pour considérer comme avérés les faits cités par M. Whitaker? Ceci dit, la vraie question que doit résoudre la Sos Commission n'est pas celle de la vérité historique. A propos de génocide des Armeniens ... M. Joinet pense q^'il faudrait admettre officiellement les massacfres de 101915-1916, mais il reconnait qu'il est difficile de sefaire une conviction sur ce point"
Some of the other statements:
Mr. Bossuyt from Belgium: said " The Government of Turkey did not deny that .... violence had been committed against the Armenian people, but it contended that there had been attempt of genocide, citing documents from the Ottoman Empire to prove that there had been no intention to destroy the Armenian population as such......... a study carried out under United Nations auspices should make a brief reference to the point of view of the Government concerned.... the Sub Commission... should not... make historical judgments in the context of a special rapporter's study "
Mr. Mazilu from Romania " declared that he was not a historian, and is not in a position to judge the past events, he thinks that the Sub Commission should also not judge the history "
Mr. Al Khasawneh from Jordan : " The subject matter of para. 24 of the report had given to considerable controversy....(he referred) in particular to the qualification of the massacres of Armenians in 1915-1916 as genocide....The Sub Commission is not a body of historians and establishment of the crime of genocide....a selective approach might lead to arguments that other cases were not cases of genocide but merely massacres....the entire text of para. 24 is unnecessary...."
Mr. Chowdhury from Bengladesh said : " The omission of various examples of genocide including the alleged Armeniam genocide from the previous report (1978 Report of Mr. Ruhashyankiko from Rwanda) which for good reasons had not been included in the report , had resulted not from absent-mindedness on the part of the previous Special Rapporteur but from a deliberate decision taken after the matter had been discussed at length as could be seen from the relevant (1978) summary record.
Mr Khalifa from Egypte : in french : " Le premier Rapporteur M. Ruhashyankiko avait soumis son rappor en 1978. D'autres chose étranges se sont passées ensuite.... L'objet même de la demande de mise a jour de ce rapport est étonnant....Mentionner le cas des Arméniens dans le rapport n'est pas pertinent; et cela est meme néfaste dans la mesure ou l'on pourrait penser que ce rappel des évenements de 1915-1916 était la principale raison de la mise a jour du rapport sur le génocide Les cas mentionnés au paragraphe 24 du rapport de M. Whitaker be sont pas suffisamment établis historiquement...Il est paradoxal qu'un rapport de l'ONU ait pour effet de réveiller certaines haines. et en particulier d'attiser encore davantage le terrorrisme.....
M. Martinez Baez Mexico : ".... we should avoid all the references to historical events ... The existence of genocide did not depend on historical references."
Mr. Sofinsky USSR : " The Special Rapporteur proposes to review and readjust the 1948 Convention which was approved by 96 States and has 40 years of practical experience. The report of the Rapporteur is inaccurate..."
posted by M.A.M
[2b] “…The U.N. Sub-Commission did not adopt the report, it was simply satisfied to take note of it... “ Le Journal de Genève, “Une certaine reserve” (A certain reserve), October 14, 1985:
See how the Armenian lobby, the perpetual fabricators and falsifiers – in the true tradition of Andonian, Morgenthau, Lepsius, early Toynbee, and others – shamefully distorts facts to deceive unsuspecting readers and how they manipulate the U.S. Congress through ignorant but greedy proxies. See what caliber of people are attempting to legislate history and weep!
 “Turkish foreign minister: Genocide resolution would harm relations”, By Desmond Butler, ASSOCIATED PRESS , 3:47 p.m. February 6, 2007:
WASHINGTON – Turkeys foreign minister said Tuesday a proposed resolution in Congress to condemn as genocide the early 20th century killings of up to 1.5 million Armenians would harm Turkish-American relations if it passes.
Abdullah Gul, speaking after meeting with top U.S. officials, described the possible resolution as an irritant to otherwise close cooperation with the United States on vital issues including bringing political stability to Iraq, preventing nuclear proliferation and connecting Asian energy supplies with European markets.
The Bush administration says it will work with members of Congress to head off the genocide resolution, but Gul warned the U.S. government to stay away from the dispute.
“I believe that Turkish-American relations should not be taken hostage by this issue,” he said. “I see this as a real threat to our relationship.”
The administration also sees the issue as a threat to relations with Turkey, a secular democracy with a majority Muslim population and a key strategic ally. The administration has opposed previous attempts by members of Congress to pass resolutions recognizing the 1915-1919 killings in Anatolia as an organized genocide.
Armenians cite numerous scholars who contend that Turkeys predecessor state, the Ottoman Empire, caused the Armenian deaths in a genocide.
The Turkish government has said the toll is wildly inflated, and Armenians were killed or displaced in civil unrest during the disarray surrounding the empires collapse.
Turkey illustrated how seriously it takes the issue in October, when it said it would suspend military operations with France after French lawmakers voted in October to make it a crime to deny the killings were a genocide.
Gul made no such threats against the United States, which relies heavily on Incirlik Air Base, a major installation in southern Turkey, to launch operations into Iraq and Afghanistan. Incirlik was the northern base for warplanes enforcing no-fly rules against Saddam Husseins Iraq after the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
Before meeting with Gul, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called Turkey “a strategic ally, a global partner (that) shares our values.”
 “US-Turkey relations set to worsen over Iraq and Armenian 'genocide'”, By Guy Dinmore in Washington and Vincent Boland in Ankara , The Financial Times Limited, London, UK, Friday Feb 9 2007
Turkey's strained relationship with the Bush administration is likely to worsen after its foreign minister, Abdullah Gul, failed to make significant progress on Ankara's main objectives in Washington this week.
Disagreements, centred on Iraq and a resolution proposed in the US Congress that would officially recognise the mass killings of Ottoman Armenians as genocide, threaten to intensify anti-American sentiment in Turkey, while raising concerns in the US about a possible Turkish military intervention in northern Iraq.
Analysts suggest the disputes could undermine US efforts to enlist Turkey's support in isolating Iran, an issue that Dick Cheney, US vice-president, is believed to have raised.
Mr Gul's week-long visit to the US had three main aims: to get a firm US commitment to act against anti-Turkish PKK militants in northern Iraq; to postpone a referendum due this year on the status of Iraq's Kurdish-claimed and oil-rich city of Kirkuk; and to lobby against the Armenia resolution.
"Gul will not leave Washington a very happy man," said Bulent Aliriza, analyst with the CSIS think-tank. "Relations will take a hit."
Mr Gul told reporters that the proposed genocide resolution - which is backed by key lawmakers, including Nancy Pelosi, Democratic speaker of the House - posed a "real threat" to US-Turkey relations.
"It really is a nightmare for us and for you. It will overshadow and spoil everything between us," he warned.
Ms Pelosi signalled her position by not being available to meet Mr Gul.
The White House is also unhappy with the resolution, but it remains uncertain how far President George W. Bush will go to lobby against it.
Several countries, notably France, have already adopted a similar stance on recognising the killings of Christian Armenians by Ottoman troops as the empire collapsed in 1915. Armenians say it was genocide. Turkey denies this and says they, and hundreds of thousands of Muslim Turks, died as a result of civil war, displacement, disease and hunger.
Anxiety has been heightened by the murder in Istanbul on January 19 of Hrant Dink, a prominent Turkish-Armenian journalist. Mr Dink was well known among the Armenian diaspora in the US, especially in California, the home state of Ms Pelosi.
On Kirkuk, US officials say it is for the Iraqi government to decide whether to proceed with the referendum to decide its status.
 For the text, sponsors, and status of the ill-advised and mis-informed resolution, please click: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=hr110-106
 Citizens’ Letter To the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Senate:
As Massachusetts residents, we would like to express our strong opposition against Resolution H.RES.106 as a measure to declare the tragic events happened around 1915 between Armenians and Ottoman Empire as genocide.
Turkey and the Unites States have very strong ties, and have been allies for more than 50 years. The Turkish and Turkish-American people are merely asking for a joint Turkish-Armenian committee of experts to be established to conduct an open and rigorous historical and legal investigation that would include Armenia, Turkey, and other countries opening their archives to the investigators. This joint committee would allow the Turkish and Turkish-American people fair and unbiased representation.
Until that time, Say “NO” to the Armenian Diaspora’s endless manipulation of the American polity by saying "NO" to H.RES.106. Sincerely, The Undersigned
 TAHPAC: Dear Visitor, As you know the Armenian lobby is putting great pressure on the US political system to make their dream come true: to have the so-called genocide recognized by the US government. Needless to say, they managed to get many people, including your congressman/woman, to believe in their outrageous lies. If you think these lies and the slander campaign against Turkey has gone too far, now is time for you to do your part. Please join in our campaign to get our voice heard. Send a fax to your representatives and senators and let them know that your opinion counts. Please select your state in the list below to continue. Thank you.
Labels: Ergun KIRLIKOVALI