Phorum.com.gr

Turkey summons US ambassador over Armenian genocide recognition
Biden said on Saturday that the 1915 killings constituted genocide, a historic declaration that infuriated Turkey and further strained frayed ties between the two NATO allies.

By JERUSALEM POST STAFF APRIL 25, 2021 01:50

πατησιωτης έγραψε: 25 Απρ 2021, 00:22

Ζενίθεδρος έγραψε: 25 Απρ 2021, 00:00 Το ξερω οτι θεωρείς βασίλειο των ξωτικών του δάσους τις ΗΠΑ και κακή την Ρωσία, αλλά εάν αντικαταστήσεις το Ρωσία με ΗΠΑ και το Αρμενία με Ελλάδα, θα έχεις μια εύκολη εξήγηση για τα Δεκεμβριανά του 08.

Πραγματικά αυτή η ιστορία είναι η πιο αστεία από όλες.Η καραμανλική αφήγηση δηλαδή που λέει ότι τις ταραχές τις οργάνωσαν οι Αμερικανοί.Εν τω μεταξύ όλος ο κόσμος είδε τον Αλαβάνο ορυόμενο να απειλεί και τους συριζαίους να παίρνουν τους μαθητές των σχολείων να πετροβολήσουν τα αστυνομικά τμήματα.Άλλωστε αναρχοσυριζαίοι είναι και αυτοί που κάθε χρόνο κάνουν αναμνηστικές φασαρίες.
Δηλαδή θα πρέπει να πιστέψουμε ότι οι συριζαίοι ήσαν όργανα των Αμερικανών - το έλεγαν στα σοβαρά τότε οι καραμανλικοί - για να ρίξουν τον Καραμανλή αλλά για μυστηριώδεις λόγους μετά οι καραμανλικοί έγιναν οι καλύτεροι σύμμαχοι των συριζαίων.
Κανείς καραμανλικός δεν μου το έχει εξηγήσει αυτό - και έχουμε και εδώ κάποιους,Αρίστος,aljawn - πως γίνεται να συμμαχείς πολιτικά με αυτόν που προσπάθησε να σε ρίξει δια της βίας σε συνεργασία με ξένη δύναμη.
Δηλαδή έλεος..ο Παπαγγελόπουλος ήταν διοικητής της ΕΥΠ επί Καραμανλή και έγινε υπουργός Δικαιοσύνης επί συριζα.Επανάσταση,έστω και "πορτοκαλί" που υποκινείται από ξένη δύναμη και ο διοικητής της ΕΥΠ της κυβέρνησης που βάλλεται γίνεται μετά 7 χρόνια υπουργός Δικαιοσύνης των "επαναστατών" δεν έχει ξανακουστεί στην ιστορία.

aljawn έγραψε: 25 Απρ 2021, 00:56

Philip Mortimer έγραψε: 24 Απρ 2021, 22:00 Δεν είναι η πλειοψηφία αλλά αποτελούν ένα αυξανόμενο κομμάτι της τουρκικής κοινωνίας.

Η αναγνώριση όμως της αρμενικής γενοκτονίας πλήττει στη βάση του την εικόνα του τουρκικου κράτος, διότι συνδέεται άμεσα με την ίδρυση του.
Είναι σαν να καταδικάζονταν ως δολοφόνοι όσοι έκαναν την επανάσταση του '21.

Μα εκτός από την Τρίπολη, που και αυτή αμφισβητείται, δεν υπάρχει άλλη περίπτωση αμάχων που να κακόπεσαν στα χέρια των ελλήνων το 21.
Τι μαλακίες τσαμπουνας;

Πάρταλος έγραψε: 25 Απρ 2021, 00:39

Philip Mortimer έγραψε: 25 Απρ 2021, 00:23

Πάρταλος έγραψε: 25 Απρ 2021, 00:15
Απαραίτητος είναι αλλά μπορεί όταν τον χρειαστείς να μην τον συμφέρει οικονομικά, διπλωματικά και πολιτικά να παρέμβει. Οπότε, καλό είναι να ξέρουμε με ποιον έχουμε να κάνουμε και καλό είναι να προσπαθούμε να γινούμε πιο δυνατοί.

Η χώρα προσαρμόζει τις ανάγκες και τις απαιτήσεις της με βάση τα πραγματικά δεδομένα.

Τα πραγματικά δεδομένα είναι ο σ η Τουρκία είναι πολύ μεγαλύτερο και ισχυρότερο κράτος.

Το συμφέρον είναι να είναι ενσωματωμένη στο δυτικό στρατόπεδο και σταδιακά να απορροφηθεί όχι να έχει ανεξάρτητη και απρόβλεπτη πολιτικη μόνο και μόνο για να λες μετά "εγώ σας τα λεγα".

Το να μην προκαλεί αστάθεια καθορίζεται από το καπιστρι της μεγαλύτερης δυβαμης-σεριφη, αν ;υυη αποχωρήσει σε στυλ ακροδεξιού κλόουν Τραμπ το κενό που θα αφήσει θα το καλύψει ο αυτονομουμενος μεγαλύτερος παίκτης της περιοχής.

Ε τότε, κακώς ο Τζο αναγνώρισε τη γενοκτονία γιατί την διώχνει ακόμη πιο μακριά από το δυτικό στρατόπεδο ,εκτός αν της προσφέρει κάτι άλλο ανάλογης αξίας με τη ζημιά που της έκανε.

aljawn έγραψε: 25 Απρ 2021, 00:56

Philip Mortimer έγραψε: 24 Απρ 2021, 22:00 Δεν είναι η πλειοψηφία αλλά αποτελούν ένα αυξανόμενο κομμάτι της τουρκικής κοινωνίας.

Η αναγνώριση όμως της αρμενικής γενοκτονίας πλήττει στη βάση του την εικόνα του τουρκικου κράτος, διότι συνδέεται άμεσα με την ίδρυση του.
Είναι σαν να καταδικάζονταν ως δολοφόνοι όσοι έκαναν την επανάσταση του '21.

Μα εκτός από την Τρίπολη, που και αυτή αμφισβητείται, δεν υπάρχει άλλη περίπτωση αμάχων που να κακόπεσαν στα χέρια των ελλήνων το 21.
Τι μαλακίες τσαμπουνας;

Philip Mortimer έγραψε: 25 Απρ 2021, 09:02
Φυσικά και υπήρξαν σφαγές, και χαρακτηριστικό παράδειγμα αποτελεί η Τρίπολη που καθόλου αμφισβητούμενη δεν είναι... Πόσοι μουσουλμάνοι και Εβραίοι υπήρχαν προηγουμένως;

"Τουρκος μη μείνει στον Μοριά μηδέ στον κόσμο όλο"

πατησιωτης έγραψε: 25 Απρ 2021, 07:15 Πολλοί έχουν ανακηρύξει "γενοκτονίες" που έκαναν οι Έλληνες αλλά το πρόβλημα για αυτούς είναι ότι η Ελλάδα είχε ισχυρούς συμμάχους πάντα - παρά την κλάψα που αναδύεται συνήθως - που φυσικά δεν υπάρχει περίπτωση να αποδεχθούν ότι ήσαν συνένοχοι.
Για την ελληνική επανάσταση δεν συζητείται - όλοι είδαν τι έγινε για τα 200 χρόνια και ποιοί ήλθαν.
Οι Αλβανοί έχουν κηρύξει μια γενοκτονία των Τσάμηδων για το 1944 αλλά το πρόβλημα τους είναι ότι η επίθεση του ΕΔΕΣ εναντίον τους έγινε μετά από εντολή του Στρατηγείου της Μέσης Ανατολής και υπήρχαν σύνδεσμοι Άγγλοι αξιωματικοί ενώ οι Τσάμηδες ήσαν σύμμαχοι των Γερμανών.Καλή τύχη με αυτό,μόνο ο Μαργαρίτης θα την αναγνωρίσει.
Οι Σλαβομακεδόνες που μιλάνε για εθνοκάθαρση και γενοκτονία τους στον εμφύλιο θα πρέπει να βάλουν συνυπεύθυνο τον Τρούμαν που εξόπλιζε τον ελληνικό στρατό - αυτή θα την αναγνωρίσει μόνο ο "Ιός της Κυριακής".

Philip Mortimer έγραψε: 25 Απρ 2021, 09:02

aljawn έγραψε: 25 Απρ 2021, 00:56

Philip Mortimer έγραψε: 24 Απρ 2021, 22:00 Δεν είναι η πλειοψηφία αλλά αποτελούν ένα αυξανόμενο κομμάτι της τουρκικής κοινωνίας.

Η αναγνώριση όμως της αρμενικής γενοκτονίας πλήττει στη βάση του την εικόνα του τουρκικου κράτος, διότι συνδέεται άμεσα με την ίδρυση του.
Είναι σαν να καταδικάζονταν ως δολοφόνοι όσοι έκαναν την επανάσταση του '21.

Μα εκτός από την Τρίπολη, που και αυτή αμφισβητείται, δεν υπάρχει άλλη περίπτωση αμάχων που να κακόπεσαν στα χέρια των ελλήνων το 21.
Τι μαλακίες τσαμπουνας;

Φυσικά και υπήρξαν σφαγές, και χαρακτηριστικό παράδειγμα αποτελεί η Τρίπολη που καθόλου αμφισβητούμενη δεν είναι... Πόσοι μουσουλμάνοι και Εβραίοι υπήρχαν προηγουμένως;

"Τουρκος μη μείνει στον Μοριά μηδέ στον κόσμο όλο"

ΣΦΑΓΗ Η σφαγή είναι δολοφονική πράξη, η οποία συνήθως οδηγεί στον θάνατο πολλών ατόμων. Θεωρείται ηθικά απαράδεκτη, ειδικά όταν διαπράττεται από μια ομάδα πολιτικών φορέων κατά ανυπεράσπιστων θυμάτων.

Δεν υπάρχει αντικειμενικός ορισμός για το τι αποτελεί μια σφαγή. Διάφοροι διεθνείς οργανισμοί έχουν προτείνει ένα επίσημο ορισμό του όρου εγκλήματα κατά της ανθρωπότητας, κατά τον οποίο θα συμπεριλαμβάνονται περιπτώσεις δίωξης ή κατάχρησης που δεν οδηγούν σε θάνατο.[1] Αντίθετα, μια «σφαγή» δεν είναι απαραίτητα "έγκλημα κατά της ανθρωπότητας"

ΓΕΝΟΚΤΟΝΙΑ .η συστηματική, σκόπιμη και μαζική εξόντωση και αφανισμός ενός ολόκληρου έθνους ή φυλετικής ομάδας (με δολοφονίες, πρόκληση σωματικών ή ψυχικών τραυμάτων, εμποδισμό των γεννήσεων, εκτοπισμό κ.ά.)

Biden recognizing the Armenian genocide shows how far Turkey and Erdogan have fallen

For the first time in many years, Turkey's president needs the U.S. more than Washington needs him. Biden is seizing this opportunity.

It took President Joe Biden more than three months in office to call Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. That alone was a sign of the fall in status of a country that was once one of America’s closest strategic allies across the Middle East, Southeastern Europe and the Eastern Mediterranean. But much worse for Ankara was the message Biden delivered when he finally picked up the phone Friday, as first reported by Bloomberg: The U.S. government was finally recognizing the 1915 Ottoman killing of Armenians as a genocide.

Why is Biden treating Erdogan with such apparent political condescension? And more importantly, why is Biden keeping his campaign promise to recognize the Armenian genocide when none of his predecessors in the White House did so once they assumed the presidency?

Biden, of course, is not being mean. He is simply aware that for the first time in many years, Erdogan needs the U.S. more than Washington needs him. Biden is, accordingly, using this window as a lever, hoping to correct some of Erdogan’s behavior, including his anti-democratic actions and close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

For years, the U.S. has seen Turkey as too important to alienate by designating its massacre of 1.5 million Armenians during World War I a genocide, despite nearly universal recognition of that description by academics and the larger American society, as well as tremendous domestic pressure for recognition from the politically engaged American Armenian community and others.

The crux of the issue now isn’t that Biden is mad at Erdogan, but rather that almost the entire U.S. government is. Many inside and outside the administration see Erdogan as an autocrat who poses a threat to U.S. interests regionally.

Where Turkey was once a beacon of democracy among Muslim-majority nations, Erdogan’s clampdown on fair elections, freedom of speech and judicial independence have repulsed Americans. Where Turkey was once a pillar of hope for an open and modern Muslim-majority society, Erdogan’s social conservatism and nativist-populist tactics have shifted the country toward intolerance and societal polarization.

Where Turkey was once so strategically aligned with the West that it became the easternmost member of NATO, under Erdogan it has routinely sparred with the organization and even thwarted it on occasion. And where Turkey was once close friends with important Middle East players like Israel, Erdogan’s reorientation toward political Islamist groups such as Hamas have burned important regional bridges.

I have tracked U.S.-Turkey ties since 2002. In the past, when a new president was elected after promising to recognize the Armenian genocide, he would immediately face a "dam" of U.S. departments and agencies explaining why the move would be a mistake, given Turkish objections.

Turkey opposes this designation because it’s concerned about its practical implications — chief among them, opening the government up to calls for reparations — as well as its symbolism. It doesn’t want to be seen as a pariah country, and at the same time it wants the large number of Turks, Kurds and other Muslims killed by Armenian-allied Russia during World War I to be acknowledged, as well.

Turkey has devoted considerable funds to lobbying at the U.S. Capitol, organized academic conferences and published books on the issue to keep Washington from changing its language. (Interestingly, and reflective of Turkey’s still-robust civil society and democratic vibrancy, the once-taboo genocide characterization is also gaining some traction in Turkey itself, much to Erdogan’s ire.)

In the past, the Department of Defense considered Turkey a precious ally and frequently served as the key building block of the U.S. government dam, making a case that ties with Ankara superseded campaign promises about the Armenian genocide. Not anymore. Today the Pentagon, which is angry at Ankara for a bevy of issues, most notably Turkey’s 2017 purchase of a Russian-made S-400 missile defense system, is no longer interested in carrying Ankara’s water in Washington.

What’s more, Congress is positioned much more hawkishly than even the Pentagon and Biden on Turkey. Many members of Congress represent Armenian constituents who have pushed strongly for recognition of the genocide. And the legislature, which has already imposed sanctions targeting Ankara’s purchase of the Russian missile defense system, wants to punish Turkey harshly for Erdogan’s many other transgressions, confusing the president with the country in my view.

Even at the State Department’s Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, which has traditionally dealt with Ankara, Turkeyphilia is fast going out of fashion. The overall sentiment inside the U.S. government is that Erdogan responds better to Putin-style toughness than to a warm embrace.

At the same time, Erdogan is out of options that would help accommodate the Biden administration. With his disapproval rate sinking at home Erdogan is unlikely to agree to relax his autocratic control of Turkish society, lest the already vigilant opposition surges and votes him out.

And abroad, Erdogan is simply in too deep with Putin to get out. If Erdogan were to return the S-400s to Russia, Putin could immediately impose trade and tourism sanctions, targeting Turkey’s ailing economy and further eroding Erdogan’s support base.

On the military front, Putin can greenlight an attack by close ally Bashar al-Assad on Idlib, the last rebel-held territory in Syria, sending hundreds of thousands of refugees across the border to Turkey. Ankara already hosts 3.6 million Syrian refugees. With Turkey’s economy slowing down and anti-refugee sentiment rising, even Erdogan wouldn’t be able to withstand the social and political forces unleashed by a vast and sudden increase in refugees.

Putin can also spoil tenuous cease fire deals between his allies and Turkey and its allies in Libya and the South Caucasus, further undermining Ankara’s interests, as well as creating troubles for Erdogan personally — since he thrives on his global strongman image domestically. I’ve always thought that stuck between Biden and Putin, Erdogan would pick Putin. That point of reckoning might be around the corner.

All of this leaves Erdogan in a weak position to push back against the genocide designation, which is also part of why Biden has chosen this moment to act. Erdogan faces a brittle Turkish economy. If his relations with Washington are in freefall, that can cause the Turkish economy to tank.

Erdogan now needs to reverse this dynamic by creating a narrative that he is getting along just fine with Biden. Accordingly, he has been patient even as Biden has ignored him and then drastically shifted American policy on the genocide. I have written Erdogan’s political biography and know that he can be very pragmatic, but also quite Machiavellian. I am certain that whichever disconsolate and evasive words he chooses in his response to Biden’s designation, he will be looking for an opportunity to get back at the U.S. president — once the Turkish economy bounces back.


https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/b ... cna1265129

Turkey denounces Biden’s statement on 1915 events

Turkey has denounced and totally rejected a statement issued by United States President Joe Biden that categorized the mass deportation of the Ottoman Armenians in 1915 as “genocide,” underlining that the move will undermine the trust and friendship between Ankara and Washington.

Turkey has summoned U.S. Ambassador to Turkey David Satterfield late April 24 to convey Ankara’s reaction to Biden’s statement, which “does not have a scholarly and legal basis, nor is it supported by any evidence.”

Biden, who took office as president of the U.S. in January, argued the 1915 incidents were genocide in his first presidential statement on the commemoration of April 24, the day of remembrance for Armenians.

“We remember the lives of all those who died in the Ottoman-era Armenian genocide and recommit ourselves to preventing such an atrocity from ever again occurring,” Biden said in a statement. “We affirm the history. We do this not to cast blame but to ensure that what happened is never repeated,” he said.

A U.S. official reiterated that the intention was not to place blame on modern Turkey, which the official called a “critical NATO ally.” “It is very much the intention of the statement - very much the intention of the President - to be doing this in a very principled way focused on the merits of human rights, and not for any reason beyond that including placing blame,” the official told reporters.

Turkey reacts to Biden

In a written statement late afternoon April 24, the Turkish Foreign Ministry expressed Turkey’s reaction against the U.S. president’s move.

“We reject and denounce in the strongest terms the statement of the President of the U.S. regarding the events of 1915 made under the pressure of radical Armenian circles and anti-Turkey groups on 24 April,” read the statement, describing Biden’s politically-motivated move as “serving only a vulgar distortion of history.”

“This statement of the U.S., which distorts the historical facts, will never be accepted in the conscience of the Turkish people, and will open a deep wound that undermines our mutual trust and friendship,” it stated.

Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu, minutes after the release of Biden’s statement, underlined that Turkey entirely rejects the recognition of the 1915 events as a genocide, on Twitter. “We have nothing to learn from anybody on our own past. Political opportunism is the greatest betrayal to peace and justice,” Çavuşoğlu said, adding “We entirely reject this statement based solely on populism.”

Presidential spokesman and chief foreign policy adviser, İbrahim Kalın, in an interview with Al Jazeera late April 24, contended that the U.S. administration had succumbed to the pressure of the Armenian lobby.

“The statement by the U.S. president politicizes historical facts for narrow political gains. This is really unfortunate,” he added.

Biden’s statement is based on unfounded allegations that threaten to damage normalization efforts between Turkey and Armenia, he warned. “We invite the U.S. president to correct this unfortunate statement that would open deep wounds in Turkish-U.S. relations and instead show an attitude that is fair and would serve regional peace,” he said.

Erdoğan accuses third parties

On April 24, before Biden’s declaration, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan accused “third parties” of interfering in Turkey’s affairs.

“Nobody benefits from the debates - which should be held by historians - being politicized by third parties and becoming an instrument of interference in our country,” Erdoğan said in a message to the Armenian patriarch in Istanbul.

“I respectfully commemorate the Ottoman Armenians, who lost their lives under the difficult circumstances of World War I, and offer my condolences to their grandchildren. We are all members of the human family, regardless of our ethnic origins, religious convictions, language and color. We have lived together, peacefully, in these lands for centuries. We find peace in the shadow of our crimson flag with the crescent and star,” he stated.

Erdoğan and Biden exchanged a phone call late April 23 during which the latter reportedly informed the former about his intention to call the 1915 events a “genocide” in his annual declaration.


Political parties lash out at Biden

Political parties in parliament have reacted to Biden’s illustration of the 1915 events as genocide, except for the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP).

Faik Öztrak, the spokesperson of the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), said in a statement “U.S. President Joe Biden’s description of the painful events of 1915 as ‘genocide’ has gone down in history as a great mistake.” But he also blamed what he called Erdoğan’s wrongful foreign policy as the reason behind the deterioration of Turkey’s ties with allied nations.

Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) leader Devlet Bahçeli said the history of the Turkish nation has seen neither genocides nor massacres, while describing Biden’s remarks as “scandalous.”

“The reason for the need for deportation [of Armenians], and the needs and national security considerations from which it arose, should be interpreted primarily in the context of the dark, bloody conditions of World War I,” he added.

History has made its judgement and the chapter of the justified, legitimate act of the state in 1915 is essentially closed, said Bahçeli.

Meral Akşener, the chair of the İYİ (Good) Party, called Biden’s statement a grave attack against the honor and reputation of the Turkish people, in a written statement on April 24. “It goes without saying the use of the word genocide by U.S. President Joe Biden will give a heavy blow to our relations.”

https://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turke ... nts-164198

Δημοκρατικός έγραψε: 25 Απρ 2021, 16:25

Spoiler

Biden recognizing the Armenian genocide shows how far Turkey and Erdogan have fallen

For the first time in many years, Turkey's president needs the U.S. more than Washington needs him. Biden is seizing this opportunity.

It took President Joe Biden more than three months in office to call Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. That alone was a sign of the fall in status of a country that was once one of America’s closest strategic allies across the Middle East, Southeastern Europe and the Eastern Mediterranean. But much worse for Ankara was the message Biden delivered when he finally picked up the phone Friday, as first reported by Bloomberg: The U.S. government was finally recognizing the 1915 Ottoman killing of Armenians as a genocide.

Why is Biden treating Erdogan with such apparent political condescension? And more importantly, why is Biden keeping his campaign promise to recognize the Armenian genocide when none of his predecessors in the White House did so once they assumed the presidency?

Biden, of course, is not being mean. He is simply aware that for the first time in many years, Erdogan needs the U.S. more than Washington needs him. Biden is, accordingly, using this window as a lever, hoping to correct some of Erdogan’s behavior, including his anti-democratic actions and close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

For years, the U.S. has seen Turkey as too important to alienate by designating its massacre of 1.5 million Armenians during World War I a genocide, despite nearly universal recognition of that description by academics and the larger American society, as well as tremendous domestic pressure for recognition from the politically engaged American Armenian community and others.

The crux of the issue now isn’t that Biden is mad at Erdogan, but rather that almost the entire U.S. government is. Many inside and outside the administration see Erdogan as an autocrat who poses a threat to U.S. interests regionally.

Where Turkey was once a beacon of democracy among Muslim-majority nations, Erdogan’s clampdown on fair elections, freedom of speech and judicial independence have repulsed Americans. Where Turkey was once a pillar of hope for an open and modern Muslim-majority society, Erdogan’s social conservatism and nativist-populist tactics have shifted the country toward intolerance and societal polarization.

Where Turkey was once so strategically aligned with the West that it became the easternmost member of NATO, under Erdogan it has routinely sparred with the organization and even thwarted it on occasion. And where Turkey was once close friends with important Middle East players like Israel, Erdogan’s reorientation toward political Islamist groups such as Hamas have burned important regional bridges.

I have tracked U.S.-Turkey ties since 2002. In the past, when a new president was elected after promising to recognize the Armenian genocide, he would immediately face a "dam" of U.S. departments and agencies explaining why the move would be a mistake, given Turkish objections.

Turkey opposes this designation because it’s concerned about its practical implications — chief among them, opening the government up to calls for reparations — as well as its symbolism. It doesn’t want to be seen as a pariah country, and at the same time it wants the large number of Turks, Kurds and other Muslims killed by Armenian-allied Russia during World War I to be acknowledged, as well.

Turkey has devoted considerable funds to lobbying at the U.S. Capitol, organized academic conferences and published books on the issue to keep Washington from changing its language. (Interestingly, and reflective of Turkey’s still-robust civil society and democratic vibrancy, the once-taboo genocide characterization is also gaining some traction in Turkey itself, much to Erdogan’s ire.)

In the past, the Department of Defense considered Turkey a precious ally and frequently served as the key building block of the U.S. government dam, making a case that ties with Ankara superseded campaign promises about the Armenian genocide. Not anymore. Today the Pentagon, which is angry at Ankara for a bevy of issues, most notably Turkey’s 2017 purchase of a Russian-made S-400 missile defense system, is no longer interested in carrying Ankara’s water in Washington.

What’s more, Congress is positioned much more hawkishly than even the Pentagon and Biden on Turkey. Many members of Congress represent Armenian constituents who have pushed strongly for recognition of the genocide. And the legislature, which has already imposed sanctions targeting Ankara’s purchase of the Russian missile defense system, wants to punish Turkey harshly for Erdogan’s many other transgressions, confusing the president with the country in my view.

Even at the State Department’s Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, which has traditionally dealt with Ankara, Turkeyphilia is fast going out of fashion. The overall sentiment inside the U.S. government is that Erdogan responds better to Putin-style toughness than to a warm embrace.

At the same time, Erdogan is out of options that would help accommodate the Biden administration. With his disapproval rate sinking at home Erdogan is unlikely to agree to relax his autocratic control of Turkish society, lest the already vigilant opposition surges and votes him out.

And abroad, Erdogan is simply in too deep with Putin to get out. If Erdogan were to return the S-400s to Russia, Putin could immediately impose trade and tourism sanctions, targeting Turkey’s ailing economy and further eroding Erdogan’s support base.

On the military front, Putin can greenlight an attack by close ally Bashar al-Assad on Idlib, the last rebel-held territory in Syria, sending hundreds of thousands of refugees across the border to Turkey. Ankara already hosts 3.6 million Syrian refugees. With Turkey’s economy slowing down and anti-refugee sentiment rising, even Erdogan wouldn’t be able to withstand the social and political forces unleashed by a vast and sudden increase in refugees.

Putin can also spoil tenuous cease fire deals between his allies and Turkey and its allies in Libya and the South Caucasus, further undermining Ankara’s interests, as well as creating troubles for Erdogan personally — since he thrives on his global strongman image domestically. I’ve always thought that stuck between Biden and Putin, Erdogan would pick Putin. That point of reckoning might be around the corner.

All of this leaves Erdogan in a weak position to push back against the genocide designation, which is also part of why Biden has chosen this moment to act. Erdogan faces a brittle Turkish economy. If his relations with Washington are in freefall, that can cause the Turkish economy to tank.

Erdogan now needs to reverse this dynamic by creating a narrative that he is getting along just fine with Biden. Accordingly, he has been patient even as Biden has ignored him and then drastically shifted American policy on the genocide. I have written Erdogan’s political biography and know that he can be very pragmatic, but also quite Machiavellian. I am certain that whichever disconsolate and evasive words he chooses in his response to Biden’s designation, he will be looking for an opportunity to get back at the U.S. president — once the Turkish economy bounces back.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/b ... cna1265129