TURKEY-ARMENIA: EMBASSY RECOMMENDS NO USG

C O N F I D E N T I A L ANKARA 002420

SIPDIS


E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/11/2013
TAGS: PGOV PREL TU
SUBJECT: TURKEY-ARMENIA: EMBASSY RECOMMENDS NO USG
STATEMENT ON TARC HISTORICAL STUDY

(U) Classified by Ambassador W.R. Pearson. Reasons:
1.5(b)(d).



1. (U) Action recommendation--paras 5-6.



2. (C) Embassy Ankara understands that the Department may be
considering issuing a statement noting the conclusions
reached by an ICTJ panel, meeting under Turkish-ARMENIAn
Reconciliation Committee (TARC) auspices March 10, regarding
the legal applicability of the term "genocide" to the World
War One-era massacres of ARMENIAns by elements of the Ottoman
Empire.



3. (C) Both Embassy and ConGen Istanbul have looked carefully
into the facts concerning the TARC's deliberations. As we
understand it from multiple Turkish interlocutors, there was
considerable disagreement between the Turkish and ARMENIAn
sides and unhappiness on the Turkish side over the way TARC
handled the report.



4. (C) The Turks see the report as clearly overstepping its
narrow mandate. Rather than confining itself to questions
surrounding the legal applicability of the term "genocide,"
the TARC report delved into issues of historical
applicability as well. As a result, the Turks, both
panelists and the MFA, have no objection to the first part of
the report, which deals with the legal issues -- particularly
since it clearly states that the UN Convention cannot be
applied retroactively and that there can be no collective
responsibility. However, they reject the report's treatment
of historical matters as beyond the scope of the ICTJ and
lacking in depth.


--------------
Post's Conclusion and Recommendation
--------------



5. (C) Washington can best judge the equities here. If there
is no requirement for the USG to endorse a statement of a
private group, our choice would be to avoid it. We have so
far managed the considerable tensions in the ARMENIAn Turkish
Track II process well by reminding everyone that the effort
is non-governmental. Mixing the two Tracks, even once, will
leave them intertwined. If there should be a statement, our
preference would be after April 24. Perhaps there are some
salon intellectuals in Istanbul or retired diplomats with
contacts with this group who do not object to a pre-April 24
statement, but these people have no connection and no
influence whatsoever on GOT thinking or reactions. Following
their line on Iraq and Cyprus, these people might even be
happy to have the AK Party embarrassed or cornered on the
ARMENIAn issue. If there is to be a statement and it is to
be before April 24, we recommend that Ambassador Logoglu be
briefed in advance and that we receive the cleared press
guidance well in advance. We appreciate the opportunity to
provide our views.
PEARSON