French-Turkish Rift Puts NATO at Risk

The recent unanimous vote by both houses of the French Parliament proclaiming that the Ottoman Empire’s massacre of Armenians at the beginning of the 20th century constitutes “a genocide” may well end up complicating the construction of a more united Europe.

This is not to belittle the genuine historical grievances of the Armenians, who unquestionably suffered abominable atrocities and who were forced in vast numbers to leave their country and their belongings. Since the brutal regime of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, this has come to be known as “ethnic cleansing,” but it was on an even greater scale against Armenians. Whether this represented “genocide” or not is a point best left to historians. Legislative chambers have many abilities, but passing judgment on distant historical events is not one of them.

The strange decision of the French Parliament is, of course, political. It had to pass a law to voice its opinion because the French Constitution does not allow Parliament to vote on resolutions. France was the first country of emigration for displaced Armenians, and even today a large portion of that population, though integrated, retains a sense of historical injustice because modern Turkey, while bearing no responsibility for events that preceded it, has always refused to express regret for the misdeeds of its Ottoman predecessors.

The Armenians have therefore concentrated their attention on the recognition by Western countries of their claims of genocide, like the Jews and the Gypsies at the hands of the Nazis. That the situations really cannot compare was not important in their view. The key was the feeling among Armenians that this would redress on a moral level the wrongs they suffered.

Next month, France will vote to renew its 36,000 local councils, in which all city mayors--including those in Paris, Lyon and Marseilles--will face strong challenges. The results will in turn set the scene for the presidential and parliamentary elections, which will take place a year later. Therefore, it is not surprising that French Armenian community leaders saw their chance and seized it, with predictable results. With no veto power, President Jacques Chirac could not replicate President Clinton’s success in stopping the U.S. House of Representatives from adopting a similar resolution last October.

The Turkish government has predictably decided to punish French companies, which have now been excluded from bidding on a series of contracts.

More significantly, the French Parliament’s vote will further complicate the task of making the fledgling European Security and Defense Policy complementary to NATO and ensuring a better sharing of burdens and responsibilities between the United States and Europe in the management of the Continent’s security.

In order to avoid duplication and waste, Europeans and Americans have agreed to let the newly created European rapid-reaction force benefit from NATO planning facilities. This will not only have a practical financial advantage, it will also ensure that, with European Union military operations being planned at NATO, the danger of a transatlantic split would almost certainly be averted.

The Europeans tried to establish sufficient links between the European Union and NATO to avoid isolating NATO members like Turkey, which are outside the EU. Still, at the NATO ministerial meeting in December, Turkey alone opposed the use of NATO planning facilities by the European rapid-reaction force. The hope remained, however, that further consultations between the Turks and their allies would make a future arrangement possible.

Clearly, in view of the French Parliament’s vote, and given the leadership role played by France in the establishment of a European defense policy, Turkey’s position now is likely to become even more negative in the next few months.

This could make it impossible for Europe to use NATO’s planning facilities during its operations, which would have serious transatlantic consequences. Having launched its initiative, the European Union cannot then avoid establishing a military planning staff parallel to NATO’s. Its military planning would therefore be carried out without the United States. This in turn could encourage isolationist tendencies in the U.S., risking fulfilling the prophecy last year of then-Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen that NATO could become a “relic.”

Given the heavy reliance of Turkey on the U.S., American pressure could ensure that this doesn’t happen. The Bush administration, which asserts its strong support for NATO, would be well-advised to make applying pressure on Turkey an early priority--notwithstanding Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld’s warnings in Munich on Feb. 3 against Europeans consulting on security issues without their NATO partners.