On Ethnic Cleansing, Washington DC Has Always Been the Hypocrite
by Ted Galen Carpenter | Oct 17, 2023
U.S. administrations have repeatedly condemned foreign
adversaries for engaging in ethnic cleansing of minority populations. That has
been an explicit grievance against the People’s Republic of China (PRC) because
of Beijing’s treatment of its Uygur population in Xinjiang province, and against Syria and Iran
because of their conduct toward Kurdish inhabitants. Serbian
authorities in both Bosnia and Kosovo became high-profile targets of
Washington’s outrage because of their alleged ethnic cleansing campaigns
directed against Muslim populations. In the latter case, Bill Clinton’s
administration cited that factor as the most important justification for the
U.S.-NATO air wars against Serbs in 1995 (Bosnia)
and 1999 (Kosovo).
U.S. leaders have adopted a
very different stance, however, whenever Washington’s allies or dependents
behave in that fashion. Such hypocrisy became evident most recently when Joe
Biden’s White House reacted with nonchalance as Azerbaijan’s military forces
attacked and expelled Armenian residents from their long-standing enclave
inside Azerbaijan, Nagorno-Karabakh. The principal
policy statement came from the U.S. Agency for International
Development (USAID), and it treated the episode as akin to a humanitarian
crisis caused by a natural disaster. “The United States is deeply concerned
about reports on the humanitarian conditions in Nagorno-Karabakh and calls for
unimpeded access for international humanitarian organizations.” The
administration not only failed to explicitly condemn the brazen
case of ethnic cleansing, it (along
with Israel) had been providing arms
aid to Azerbaijan.
It was hardly coincidental
that the Azeris are important political
and security clients of Turkey, while both Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh
had close economic and military
ties with Moscow. This episode offered an ideal opportunity for
Washington to placate an increasingly restless Turkey and help take down two
Russian clients. Considerations of justice and international law seemed to play
little role in the U.S decision. Russia, bogged down in its stalemated war in
Ukraine, was in
no position to protect its Armenian allies.
The United States and Turkey
thus scored a geo-strategic victory and further eroded the Kremlin’s power in
Russia’s near abroad. However, both countries were accomplices in a clear
case of ethnic cleansing that has led to the expulsion of more than 100,000
ethnic Armenians from the enclave as of October 2, 2023. This episode
has to be especially painful for all Armenians, given the history of Turkish
oppression that culminated in the Ottoman government’s orchestration of the
Armenian genocide during World War I that claimed the lives of at
least 664,000 victims and involved the expulsion of hundreds of
thousands of other Armenian inhabitants.
It is not the first time that
Washington appeared to be content when an ethnic cleansing campaign benefited
fellow NATO member Turkey. In July 1974, Richard Nixon’s administration—and
especially Secretary of State Henry Kissinger—did little more than make
insincere clucking sounds of disapproval when Turkish forces invaded the
Republic of Cyprus and took control of the northern third of that country. Kissinger
and Nixon’s successor, Gerald Ford, remained
indifferent even as Turkey expelled Greek Cypriot residents from the
conquered territories. An angry Congress did impose sanctions on Ankara, but
pro-Turkish elements in the executive branch worked assiduously during the
following years to neutralize those sanctions and even restore military aid to
Turkey. Ankara also proceeded to establish a puppet state, the Turkish
Republic of Northern Cyprus, and bring
in thousands of settlers from mainland Turkey.
The Cyprus episode is a
flagrant case of ethnic cleansing, now about to enter its sixth decade. But one
will look in vain for explicit, strong statements from U.S. leaders condemning
Turkey’s behavior. Washington’s outrage is in short supply when a foreign
ally or client is the guilty party.
Another graphic example of
such double standards was the stance that U.S. government and its media allies
took regarding the ethnic cleansing of Serbs at the hands of the Croatian
government in the mid-1990s and the newly minted country of Kosovo at the end
of that decade. Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer
was one of few high-profile critics to point
out the hypocrisy with respect to the events in Croatia. “In four days
of blitzkrieg by the Croatian army, 150,000 Serbs living in the Krajina region
of Croatia were ethnically cleansed, sent running for their lives to Bosnia and
Serbia.” Those Serbs were not recent arrivals; most of them had family roots in
Krajina going back many generations.
Krauthammer asked some highly
pertinent questions. “In the face of what U.N. observers in Croatia call the
largest instance of ethnic cleansing in the entire Balkan wars, where were the
moralists who for years have been so loudly decrying the ethnic cleansing of
Bosnia’s Muslims? Where were the cries for blood, the demand for arms, the call
to action on behalf of today’s pitiful victims? Where were the columnists, the
senators, the other posturers who excoriate the West for standing by when
Bosnian Muslims are victimized and are silent when the victim of the day is
Serb?”
A similar posture of
indifference on the part of the U.S. government and the corporate news media
was apparent with respect to the “reverse ethnic cleansing” that took place
following NATO’s victory in Kosovo. More than 240,000
refugees—not just Serbs, but other ethnic minorities as well—were displaced
from Kosovo. The Kosovo Liberation Army’s ethnic cleansing campaign took place
on NATO’s watch, while thousands of alliance troops already occupying the
province stood
by and did nothing to prevent or reverse it.
The U.S. double standard has
been apparent as well with respect to Israel’s “slow motion” ethnic cleansing
of Palestinians from their homes on the occupied West Bank. For decades,
Israeli governments have confiscated
land—even portions long inhabited by Palestinian families—and turned those
plots over to Jewish settlers. The once predominantly Palestinian West Bank now
resembles a geographic Swiss cheese, with nearly
250 settler enclaves and a network of roads on which Palestinian
inhabitants are legally impeded from using. Checkpoints
and other barriers underscore the status disparity between the two
populations. Militant settlers are stepping up their
campaign to displace Palestinian residents.
Washington’s criticisms of
Israel’s actions have been tepid (at best) over the years, and even such anemic
statements have declined in frequency. The new surge of violence between Israel
and Palestinian fighters in Gaza will likely assure even greater U.S. rote
loyalty to the Israeli position on all issues.
Such repeated examples of
hypocrisy bring discredit onto U.S. policymakers. Expelling people from
their homes because of their ethnicity should be profoundly offensive no matter
who does it. If the offender is a U.S. ally or client, Washington is especially
obligated to condemn the behavior and not act as an enabler. The U.S.
record regarding ethnic cleansing has been both cynical and shameful.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario