House of Commons Hansard #18 of the 37th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was turkey.
Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements ActGovernment Orders
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bélair)
It being 5:15 p.m., the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred division on the motion at report stage and second reading of Bill C-18.
Call in the members.
(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)
Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements ActGovernment Orders
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bélair)
I declare the motion carried.
It being 5:50 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's Order Paper.
Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral Bloc Laval Centre, QC
, seconded by the members for Brampton Centre, Calgary Southeast and Halifax, moved:
That this House acknowledge the Armenian genocide of 1915 and condemn this act as a crime against humanity.
Mr. Speaker, before I begin my speech, I want to thank the members of the Conservative Party of Canada and the New Democratic Party, particularly the hon. members for Calgary Southeast and Halifax, who also wanted to second my motion.
We are debating today a matter that has, with time, become routine in the House of Commons. However, today's debate on acknowledging the Armenian genocide of 1915 has particular force this time, since it is a votable motion, unless a premature election call puts an end to our work in Parliament.
Everyone who knows me knows that I have long been interested in this matter. They know, as I do, that it is essential to acknowledge history to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. Acknowledging the past also changes how we see and therefore analyze current and future socio-political conflicts that risk turning into genocide.
I want to review the Parliament's acknowledgement in the past of the Armenian genocide, the strategies used by the lobby denying its existence, the situation in Quebec and abroad and, in conclusion, discuss the facts and the importance of voting in favour of Motion M-380.
First, the motion reads as follows:
That this House acknowledge the Armenian genocide of 1915 and condemn this act as a crime against humanity.
Since the beginning of the 37th Parliament, in other words, since the last federal election in 2000, this is the fourth time we are debating a motion to acknowledge the Armenian genocide. Of the three motions previously debated, I had the pleasure to introduce two of them and the member for Brampton Centre put forward the other.
Although most of the speeches were in favour of acknowledging the genocide, we have not had the opportunity to put this motion to a vote because of the old rules of procedure for private members' business. This is the first time in a long time that we will have the opportunity to truly take a position in this debate.
We have to go back to 1996 for the last vote in the House of Commons on this topic. At that time, parliamentarians, including myself, unanimously supported the following motion:
That the House recognize, on the occasion of the 81st anniversary of the Armenian tragedy which claimed some 1.5 million lives on April 24, 1915, and in recognition of other crimes against humanity, the week of April 20 to 27 of each year as the week of remembrance of the inhumanity of people toward one another.
This motion put forward by the Bloc Quebecois and amended by the governing party, was certainly a step in the right direction. Nonetheless, note that it did not talk about genocide, but rather a tragedy. This was not the wording originally proposed. We initially talked about an act of genocide, but it seemed to be difficult for some parliamentarians to use this term, which is how we ended up with the amendment we did.
However, there has been a lot of water under the bridge since and that is why it is all the more important to update the debate. Moreover, as surprising as it may seem in the Parliament of Canada, the Senate was the precursor to all of this.
On June 13, 2002, the Senate of Canada adopted a motion that had essentially three objectives: to recognize the events of 1915 as genocide; to condemn any attempt to deny or distort this historical truth as being anything less than genocide; and, to designate April 24 of every year as a day of remembrance of the Armenian genocide.
The Senate adopted this motion and the Earth continues to turn. This did not result in acts of violence or terrorist attacks, as certain opponents of Motion M-380 would unfortunately have us believe.
It would be useful at this point to rectify certain facts as to the pressure coming from those who agree with the denial theory. That they do not agree with my actions, I can imagine. That they do not share my viewpoint on history, no one would be surprised. By the way, we all know that history should be read with care, because it has the weakness of having been written by the victors. Still I do not approve of using a fear of terrorism to discredit the recognition of the Armenian genocide and I refuse to agree to the statement that motion M-380 is tainted with racism.
Demagoguery is certainly not the best way to enhance one's arguments. In that spirit, the various threats about peace and the deterioration of relations between Canada and Turkey do not consider the precedents for recognition of the Armenian genocide.
We must be clear that the House of Commons will not be creating a precedent by voting in favour of this motion. Just across the Ottawa River—and it was done in Ontario, too—the Quebec National Assembly officially recognized the genocide in 1980. More recently, on September 10, 2003, Quebec passed a law proclaiming April 24 Armenian genocide commemoration day.
Internationally, a number of states and parliaments have recognized the Armenian genocide. To name just a few: there was Argentina, Belgium, France, Russia, the European Parliament, the Council of Europe, and more recently, Switzerland. Many states in the U.S.—nearly 30—have also recognized this genocide.
The case of the European states and parliaments is particularly interesting. While Turkey threatened the countries that had recognized the genocide with economic and diplomatic retaliation, it was hoping, at the same time, to get support for its entry into the European union. These threats never became reality and the Turkish ambassador in Paris, having been called home for a short time after the genocide was recognized by the French National Assembly, returned to his duties.
This recognition did not stir up any particular tension in Franco-Turkish relations, nor did it provoke acts of violence or terrorism between French people of Armenian origin and those of Turkish origin.
Those who are against the motion will argue that history is for historians and that it is not up to politicians to determine what the truth is. Where facts are concerned, many experts, scholars, historians and researchers have examined them and came to the conclusion that a genocide did indeed occur. Among those experts were professor William Schabas, a specialist in international law, Léo Kuper, a genocide expert, and Raphaël Lemkin, an eminent contributor to the development of the United Nations Convention on Genocide. They have always recognized the 1915 genocide.
Among the politicians who have acknowledged the genocide are Winston Churchill and David Lloyd George, two former British Prime Ministers, as well as Adolf Hitler, who said, and I quote:
Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?
To those who are still wondering if it is up to us to reflect on history, this should be food for thought.
At the beginning of the 20th century, 1.5 million Armenians were killed. They did not die while fighting during the first world war, but rather in the context of that war, which is quite different. Following on this argument, could we say today that the six million Jews who were killed during the second world war died on the battlefield? No, they were killed in the context of the second world war, but not because of the war, that goes without saying.
It gives me great pleasure to acknowledge today the very compassionate action taken during the 1939-45 war by the Turkish ambassador to France who saved a significant number of Jews from the Lyon area from the concentration camps and probable, if not certain, death.
Before World War I, 20% of the Turkish people were not Muslim, compared to 2.5% after the war. These figures are facts that have been recognized by a great number of historians and experts.
Why should hon. members support my initiative? Let me give an example. If a person wilfully commits a murder in front of you, if everyone knows about it, including lawyers, judges and police officers, but no one acknowledges that it is a murder, what criteria will people use in the future to distinguish what is a murder and what is not? Closing our eyes to a historic reality creates the risk of making this non-acknowledgement a form of precedent for events that are occurring now and that will occur in the future.
Planning a genocide requires well defined strategies and dynamics, and we must recognize them for what they are to understand the conditions that lead to such crimes against humanity. By acknowledging that the events of 1915 are a genocide, we will allow researchers, historians and academics to study what happened, while keeping in mind that this was indeed a genocide. These people can then compare various genocides and try to identify the similarities and the circumstances that are conducive to such acts.
Once we have all the tools needed to best understand how a genocide is organized, perhaps then the international community will be able to identify the signs in time to take immediate action instead of intervening too late, as happened in the Rwandan genocide, that this House just acknowledged.
The purpose of this acknowledgement is not to condemn the current Turkish government. Nor does Motion M-380 ask that it provide any reparations in terms of money or land to the Armenians. By acknowledging the Armenian genocide, Canada is not pointing a finger at the Turkish government. It is merely acknowledging history.
In closing, I want to reassure the Turkish community and tell them that this motion in no way attempts to hold them responsible for what happened in the early 20th century. What happened belongs in the past, and we must acknowledge it as such, since we are opposed to all forms of violence and the misfortunes that violence begets.
Obviously, we will not bring the victims back, but we will, at the very least, ensure that historical justice is rendered and give ourselves the tools we need to build a better world. During their lives, individuals and peoples are often wounded. The deeper the wounds, the longer it takes to heal. I truly believe that, by acknowledging the genocide perpetrated on the Armenian people, we will be helping to heal their scars and give them and the international community the desire to view the future in solidarity and with respect for our differences.
Eleni Bakopanos LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development (Social Economy)
Mr. Speaker, first I would like to congratulate my hon. colleague. I know she is very passionate about this subject. We have had a number of opportunities to work together on this issue. I congratulate her once again on being tenacious enough to put forward her point of view once more on this subject that is very important for the Armenian community in Canada I also congratulate her for her overview of all the very important facts.
I am very sorry, but I have to say that on this side of the House there is no unanimity. There is certainly a lot of support, it is true, and we shall prove that to her when our turn comes.
I would like to ask her a question and give her the opportunity to provide more details. In the countries where this motion has already been adopted, have there been negative consequences? That is one of the criticisms one hears everywhere; that there will be negative fallout in the countries concerned.
Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral Bloc Laval Centre, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for her comments, which I greatly appreciate.
Obviously, economic threats sometimes are sometimes effective. They are used because people think they work well. All we know, particularly in the case of France, is that neither France nor Turkey has withdrawn from any of the various contracts connecting them. I am convinced that it will be the same here.
In business, people say money is money and that we pick one country over another based on whether it is in our economic interest to do so.
Just as we think that Canada will continue to negotiate with Quebec, because Canada wants to do business with Quebec, I think that, regarding the Armenian genocide and the possibility that the Turkish government may reconsider its investments in Quebec or the rest of Canada, this is another form of pressure. But as a parliamentarian and a member of the public, I know that this kind of thing has no influence on our collective decision.
Sarkis Assadourian Liberal Brampton Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the hon. member from the Bloc Quebecois for presenting the motion.
I would ask the member for her comments on the following two questions. After the French government recently passed a motion on genocide, the Swiss government did a similar thing. Could she comment on the reaction by the Turkish government to protest the action of the Swiss government? That is my first question.
Second, we have received many letters of complaint from the Turkish point of view from the United States. Those are Americans telling us what to do. I wonder if she would comment on those two points.
Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral Bloc Laval Centre, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank my dear colleague for his question. It is clear that this is an extremely sensitive matter, as much for the Armenian people as for the Turkish community. I clearly understand this.
Whether they see this as the humiliation of the Turkish community or whether they use a very powerful lobby to try to influence the parliamentarians here, I can understand that too. Nevertheless, we have not necessarily all been impressed by comments by our American friends. The recent conflict in Iraq is clear proof.
Consequently, I sincerely hope that such pressure, which is fair game, will not have the intended influence.
Maurice Vellacott Canadian Alliance Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK
Mr. Speaker, the member, in correspondence with different members in the House, has indicated that this will have no implications in terms of land or reparations. When the NDP introduced this motion in the House, it was not always part of its motion but in its stated policy it does in fact say that there should be reparations in land and other things that go back to the Armenian people.
I have a great sadness in my heart with regard to what happened in those awful days. However I am concerned that when one country, be it any country in the world, passes that, it is then used by the various--
Armenian PeoplePrivate Members' Business
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bélair)
I am sorry to interrupt but there is no time left in questions or comments.
With the Speaker's indulgence, I will allow the hon. member for Laval Centre to briefly respond.
Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral Bloc Laval Centre, QC
Mr. Speaker, in this whole issue, reparations are not what really matters. What really matters is that the Armenian people know that their historic reality and the wounds that were inflicted on them be recognized by the international community. As far as I am concerned, this is about much more than a reparatoins. It is very easy to give money or a little something but, in fact, not to acknowledge anything.
Dan McTeague LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to applaud the hon. members who are taking part in this debate. I would especially like to acknowledge, on our side, the tenacity of the members for Ahuntsic and Brampton Centre. This being my first time in this position, over the past few days they have provided me with a great deal of information on this issue. Now I am delivering a speech on this important topic. I would also like to thank the hon. member for Laval Centre, who put forward this motion, and the member for Verchères—Les-Patriotes.
I would also like to thank everyone taking part in this great debate on the tragic events that took place between 1915 and 1923 during the first world war and the fall of the Ottoman Empire. These events resulted in many victims in the Armenian community and other communities in the region.
Many atrocities were perpetrated during those years and all of Europe, the Middle East and Asia Minor suffered a great deal. Millions of people were forcibly displaced and, in addition to the terrible anguish of the exodus, many did not survive. As we know, our government has expressed on many occasions, in the House and elsewhere, its profound compassion for the Armenian people and others who suffered so much during that period.
I would also like to quote a passage from a personal message sent by the former prime minister to Canadians of Armenian descent on the occasion of the 80th anniversary of the Armenian tragedy of 1915:
Canada recognizes and deplores the fact that a great number of Armenians were killed during the wars which marked the end of the Ottoman empire and extends its sympathy to the Armenian Community.
Following the war, numerous displaced Armenians came to Canada and their contribution, as well as that of their descendants, has greatly enriched Canadian society. It is my hope that the memories of the past will serve to remind us of the importance of tolerance and respect for the diversity of our people.
I would also like to reiterate that during the debate on the Armenian tragedy in 1996, and as mentioned earlier, the House adopted a motion recognizing the week of April 20 to 27 each year as a week of remembrance of the inhumanity of people toward one another.
Again I emphasize that on June 10, 1999, following comprehensive consultations, the position of the Government of Canada with regard to these events was clearly set out in a statement made in the House by the hon. member for Halton, speaking on behalf of the foreign affairs minister.
I would like to quote from a reply by the Minister of Foreign Affairs in the House on April 18, 2002, to a question from our colleague, the member for Brampton Centre, in which the minister stated:
As [the hon. member] will recall, the government and the Prime Minister on many occasions have expressed the sympathy of our government and our people for the tragedy that occurred to the Armenian people with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.
The minister of course followed that with:
We still urge that we should consider these tragic events in their historical context and remember that we must move forward and try to ensure peace and harmony among all people.
These statements make it clear that we remember the suffering caused by this painful period and attach a great deal of importance to ensuring that the memory of this human tragedy is preserved in our collective consciousness and passed on to future generations.
Canada has always been a land of hope for the millions of immigrants who have settled here and those who continue to do so in a spirit of renewal and reconciliation. It is extremely important to keep this concept in mind. Our diversity remains one of our country's greatest qualities, helping us not only to forge economic, political and cultural links with the rest of the world, but also to project and promote our ideals and values such as tolerance, respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law.
We are all working toward ensuring that these values are reflected in the work of international organizations and in the tools developed to prevent any recurrence of the horrors of the past to uphold human rights. We have a highly credible voice in many countries and within international fora such as the United Nations and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe in discussing the real possibility that people of different origins and cultures can live together in peace and security.
The world of course listens to us because we speak knowledgeably of our own reality. Canada has steadfastly supported the development of international instruments to promote and uphold human rights and the rule of law.
We are particularly proud of Canada's leadership role in promoting major international initiatives such as the Ottawa convention on landmines and the International Criminal Court initiatives that are an integral part of Canada's global human security agenda.
We attach great importance to establishing positive, comprehensive and of course productive relationships with and between all the countries of the region, including Turkey, Armenia and Azerbaijan. Indeed, a stable, prosperous region where reconciliation has triumphed and mutual trust reigns could generate positive developments and spin-offs beyond the immediate borders of the countries concerned.
To place this issue in the context of a European dream, one characterized by reduced tensions and increasingly successful examples of peaceful solutions to political problems, the relations between Armenia and Turkey are of major concern. Again I would like to underscore what we have learned: that both Armenia and Turkey have begun negotiations to begin a process which will hopefully lead to the normalization of their relations.
We believe firmly that it is vital to establish contact, dialogue and relations when and where we can. This is why the Minister of Foreign Affairs wrote to the foreign ministers of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey, encouraging dialogue and offering our willingness to play a supportive role. Now is not the time for the House to pass the motion, as this would only result in upsetting the ongoing dialogue between Armenia and Turkey.
I realize that the motion as brought forward is one that will pit members on a number of sides on various poles and I believe it is important for us to take into consideration the good work that has been done by a lot of people to try to bring this forward. A famous prime minister once said that we must strive for justice; it is impossible to do it at all turns but certainly the most important emphasis is justice in our own time.
Bill Casey Progressive Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS
Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the distinguished member from Calgary Southeast.
Armenian PeoplePrivate Members' Business
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bélair)
You need unanimous consent to do so during private members' hour.
Bill Casey Progressive Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS
Mr. Speaker, I would ask for unanimous consent to share my time.
Armenian PeoplePrivate Members' Business
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bélair)
Is there unanimous consent?
Armenian PeoplePrivate Members' Business
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bélair)
I heard a no.
The hon. member for Cumberland—Colchester.
Bill Casey Progressive Conservative Cumberland—Colchester, NS
It is a little disappointing, Mr. Speaker, that we cannot share our time in this debate. It is disappointing because here in Canada we do try to resolve our differences by giving different points of view. We do not resort to violence or military action. It is just disappointing that this happened this way.
This is the third time that I have spoken about this issue over several years. I want to compliment the member for Brampton Centre for raising it before and also the member today for raising it again, because it is an issue that certainly means a lot to a lot of people. It brings out a lot of emotion and a lot of sadness to people's hearts when we talk about it.
I was just thinking that we in North America were all moved by the disaster of September 11 when several thousand people died. Here, we are talking about a million and a half people, 250 times as many people, who were lost during this period from 1915 to 1923. It was a catastrophe of monstrous proportions that took place at the end of the Ottoman Empire and involved World War I.
We can only just possibly imagine what it is like for the Armenians to grasp the situation when we have turned our whole continent inside out because of the September 11 disaster that we experienced. In fact, it was only a small disaster relative to what they have gone through.
The whole debate surrounds the terrible massacre of human life between 1915 and 1923, with estimates in excess of a million and a half men, women and children lost. There was violence and there were deportations, internments, mass murders and all kinds of atrocities. We in the House can hardly imagine what went on.
It is good that we raise these issues, discuss them and raise public awareness of them and that we extend our sympathy to those who still suffer and are torn over the awful events.
We abhor any mass slaughter or killings, whether they are in Rwanda, the Middle East or Europe, by any country or any group. It is important that we remember these issues and work toward finding ways to prevent them. We have a responsibility in Canada to do that now and we have a responsibility to make sure that atrocities in the past are not forgotten. We are very fortunate here in the way we resolve our issues and fortunate that we have not been subject to anything like what those people in any of these disasters that I mentioned had to have experienced.
I think it is very important that we make sure we do everything we can to prevent them, as we are in Afghanistan now and in other areas around the world. It is certainly important that we keep the issues before the public so that we will never forget these awful things that happened.
I want to end my comments with that. This is the third of three debates I have been involved with, and perhaps if I had not been involved with the debates I would never have known anything about this. I hope that Canadians who are listening will take a lesson from it, learn about this issue and give it a lot of thought.
Alexa McDonough NDP Halifax, NS
Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise tonight to support and second this motion recognizing the Armenian genocide of 90 years ago and to condemn this atrocity as a crime against humanity.
I want to commend the hon. member for Laval Centre for bringing forward such an very important motion tonight. I also want to congratulate our fellow citizens, especially Canadian Armenians, who keep fighting for justice to be done.
As you all know, my hon. colleague for Burnaby—Douglas has moved a great number of motions along those lines over the last 10 years and more.
It is also true that the NDP, through the member for Burnaby—Douglas, has called for April 24 to be officially designated as a day of remembrance for the 1.5 million Armenians who fell victim to the first genocide of the 20th century.
We have all heard false arguments for why Canada should not recognize this genocide. I am very sorry to say that I think we heard one such argument or set of arguments from the new Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs this evening. I think that is regrettable.
The most common argument that one hears--and I think we need a moment to consider this--is that if this recognition of the Armenian genocide were to be adopted by the Parliament of Canada, Canada-Turkey relations would be adversely affected.
I suppose the same people who make that argument would have argued that we in Canada should have plunged ourselves into Bush's Iraqi war because one could say that we might have suffered some retaliation. In fact, many would say we are suffering some retaliation. However, it was an important stand of principle that the Canadian people took in opposing the illegal, unjustified war in Iraq and it is time for us here in Parliament to take a similar principled stand in recognizing the Armenian genocide.
Because I do not wish to encroach on the time of other members, I want to briefly wrap up by quoting from the current president of the Armenian National Committee of Canada and again recognize the important ongoing work that has been done, contrary to the parliamentary secretary who basically says, if I understood his comments, why do we not just let it go and move to the future?
It has to be understood that people move on from such a brutalizing experience to their people, particularly family members and loved ones, by being able to have an acknowledgement of the atrocities and then being able to leave it behind them. It is a psychological matter. It is a political matter. It is an historic question of justice.
Let me quote, in conclusion, from the very thoughtful submission of the Armenian National Committee of Canada:
The recognition of the historical fact of the Armenian genocide by a political body is a genuine expression of respect towards justice, respect towards the memory of the victims, respect towards their sons and daughters all over the world including Canada.
It is not an act of vengeance as it is often portrayed by the politicians of denial, it is not an act of obligation for restitution as professed by authorities of falsification, it is not an act that would create any hatred between communities as it is erroneously represented by the outside sources.
It is merely an act of historical justice.
It is time for Canada to add its name into that list of countries [who have already done so].
I hope we will do so here tonight.
Stan Dromisky Liberal Thunder Bay—Atikokan, ON
Mr. Speaker, there has certainly been a change in the atmosphere in this chamber versus the atmosphere of two hours ago. That is a clear indication to me, and to everyone else, that this is a solemn occasion and a sensitive one for all the members present in this chamber.
I would like to tell the House that in October 1995 I was fortunate to have visited Turkey. Why did I visit Turkey? I formed the Canadian-Turkish parliamentary friendship group here and was keenly interested in that country. I was hoping to develop more positive relationships with a country that I knew very little about, and most parliamentarians knew little about the country as well.
It was a highly organized and planned trip, one in which I had complete control in determining whom I would meet, the topics of discussion, concerns, places to examine, from the highest levels of governmental and religious control to the bagel peddlers on the street. Without any doubt, it was a fantastic learning experience.
Before I left Canada, I did a lot of research and had the opportunity to meet with some Canadians of Armenian descent and leaders in the Armenian community.
I will never forget that meeting because they did their very best to convince me not to visit Turkey. They presented to me a picture of a country where they claimed human rights did not exist for the masses and where the Kurds were being persecuted daily.
For instance, one story I remember so vividly claimed that if people were caught speaking on the street or overhead on the bus or on the streetcars speaking one of the Kurdish dialects, they were reported and could be punished. They told me quite a few others.
I soon discovered that none of their horror stories were true. The constitutional protocol of the Turkish government states:
Differences of languages, faith, and origin within our national culture enriches our cultural life. The natural prerequisite of a democratic social structure is that these differences can be expressed freely within the scope of national integrity.
Seventeen constitutional amendments, early in 1995, introduced democratic reforms in the human rights areas, the most important being freedom of speech, freedom of association and freedom of assembly.
These reforms are working. I found that there were 15 Kurdish newspapers, numerous books written in the Kurdish dialects and today, eight years later, the evidence is overwhelming with over 3,000 independent, not government controlled, radio stations, some broadcasting in the Kurdish dialect.
While visiting the Turkish grand national assembly, which is its parliament, I discovered that over 100 members sitting in that parliament were of Kurdish descent, such as the minister of foreign affairs, Mr. Hikmet Cetin.
With all the democratic improvements that have taken place in Turkey since 1995--and I compare it to all the other countries surrounding Turkey and near Turkey--I firmly believe that Turkey stands out as the most secular and democratic state in the Middle East.
During my first visit I met many Canadians who had invested in economic projects in Turkey. From Montreal, there was the famous LaSalle College International Fashion School, whose graduates are found in many houses of fashion throughout the world. There was Netas, a giant telecommunications enterprise in Istanbul, a company which is 51% owned by Northern Telecom, and the list goes on.
The highlight of my visit was visiting the enormous complex subway system that was under construction in Ankara, the capital city. Government officials, engineers and representatives from Bombardier Incorporated and SNC-Lavalin, Quebec companies, and a delegation of officials from the Bombardier plant in Thunder Bay--Thunder Bay is my riding--where the subway cars were built, took me on the first trial run of the cars in that system. In that trial run I discovered that they were all highly impressed by the effectiveness of the system and by the superior workmanship revealed within the subway cars.
There is not enough time to deal with the economic relationships between Canadian and Turkish companies. Supporting and accepting this motion, for which there is absolutely no proof of a planned genocide of Armenians, would have disastrous economic effects on Canada's economy.
At this very moment, pending the outcome of this motion, we could win or lose a billion dollar contract to have over 300 subway cars built in the Bombardier plant in Thunder Bay. Over 1,000 employees are involved, mostly highly trained and skilled union members. Parts are manufactured in Thunder Bay, which involves a great number of other skilled workmen, and a great number of parts and systems are manufactured in Quebec.
SNC-Lavalin, a major contributor to telecommunications and control systems for the subway, would also be severely affected, which would mean a decrease in employment of this company, not only in Ontario, but especially in Quebec.
Our ties with Turkey are growing in a very positive manner and we must not jeopardize this beneficial growth in an emotional, reckless, foolhardy manner.
I would like to say a word now about the claimed planned genocide. The Ottoman Empire was comprised of 25 countries. For many years turmoil prevailed throughout certain regions, especially in eastern Anatolia and Armenia, which is in the far eastern section of what we now call Turkey. Even before the Balkan war started in 1912, many were moving and leaving that area for safer havens. Prior to 1912, British, French and Ottoman sources claim the Armenian population was somewhere between 1.05 million and 1.5 million.
Historian Dr. Justin McCarthy of the University of Louisville, British historian Arnold Toynbee and Monseigneur Touchet, a French missionary, all calculated that the Armenians lost approximately 600,000 people from 1912 to 1920. However, during the same period, over 2.5 million Muslims, including Turks, Kurds and Tartars, died in eastern Anatolia. We have no idea how many Russians were killed.
The Armenian delegation to the Paris Peace Conference in 1920 declared that, after the war, 280,000 Armenians remained in the Anatolian portion of the occupied Ottoman Empire while 700,000 Armenians emigrated to other countries such as France, Australia, the United States, and Canada, where the majority went to Quebec. Clearly then, a great portion of the Ottoman Armenians were not killed as claimed.
Each needless death is tragic. Equally tragic are lies meant to inflame and perpetuate ethnic hatred. That is not the Canadian way.
In conclusion I would like to quote what the former prime minister, Jean Chrétien, said on April 24, 2002:
--let us be reminded of the importance of working together to eliminate intolerance and fanaticism wherever it appears, and to promote reconciliation and cooperation among peoples.
That is the Canadian way.
Jason Kenney Canadian Alliance Calgary Southeast, AB
Mr. Speaker, before I begin debate, what is the scheduled rotation? There has been some discussion about changing it.
Armenian PeoplePrivate Members' Business
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bélair)
At this point in time, I try to alternate between the government and the opposition, and each and every party, if that is possible. Right now in the rotation it should be a Conservative member, followed by a Liberal, and this should bring us to 6:50 which is closing time.
Jason Kenney Canadian Alliance Calgary Southeast, AB
Mr. Speaker, in recognition of my colleague from Brampton, I will only take three or four minutes.
I have spoken on similar motions a couple of times and I have put on the record what I think is a pretty compelling and undeniable historical record. In my last intervention on this issue, I began reading from headlines that appeared in Canadian media outlets during 1915 and 1916. I would like to continue citing a few of these.
I would like the member from Thunder Bay to perhaps listen to what the Canadian media was reporting as objective news facts during the genocide.
The headline in London Free Press on October 22, 1915, read, “Armenian race may disappear before war ends. Vatican has appealed for unfortunate people”.
The Globe newspaper, predecessor to the Globe and Mail , reported on October 23, 1915, “A million Armenians wiped out by Turks. Only 200,000 Armenian inhabitants of Turkey now remain in country”.
The Globe on Saturday the 27th, 1915, reported “unspeakable cruelty to the lot of Armenians, massacres of unsurpassing horror committed, people burned alive, torturing, beggaring, all descriptive language practised on defenceless Christians.
That was according to Viscount Bryce.
The Ottawa Evening Journal on November 29, 1915, reported, “a saturnalia of slaughter by refined methods as young Turks set out to wipe Armenian race out of the world”.
The Ottawa Evening Journal of November 30, 1915, reported, “crime of Belgian venial sin when Armenian massacre known to nations”.
Those were the headlines in the Canadian media of the era.
Finally, the Globe newspaper, on December 15, 1915, reported, “a million Armenians massacred by Turks. Lord Bryce publishes further report of atrocities in Asia Minor”.
Those were the accounts of Canadian journalists and their firsthand sources in the region at the time. This is not some arcane debate between historians on differing sides. This is a recognized objective, historical fact that cannot be denied.
Let me move briefly to the comments of the parliamentary secretary, who continues to use the government's language of a tragedy. Oxford describes a tragedy as “a serious accident...or natural catastrophe”, whereas it defines a genocide as “the mass extermination of human beings, esp. of a particular race or nation”.
I believe the historical fact is absolutely clear and undeniable that that was what occurred during the first world war in that region. There was a deliberate attempt by an element of the then Ottoman government to destroy the Armenian people. I believe that just as the western world has recognized the reality of the Holocaust and has learned from the terrible historical lessons of that era, so too must we learn from the first great genocide of the last century.
I closing I want to say that I have many friends in the Turkish Canadian community. I have had representations made to me by the excellent Turkish ambassador to Canada, by the Turkish consul in Calgary and other members of that community. I believe the passage of this motion should in no way, shape or form cast any kind of cloud over the marvellous contribution made to Canada by Turkish immigrants, nor should it in any way inhibit our fantastic relationship with our NATO ally and aspiring European Union member in Turkey.
I reject categorically the notion that acceptance of the historical reality of the genocide will in any way inhibit our relationship with Turkey. I believe in that relationship. I am a fan of Turkey as a Muslim country that is seeking to lead the way in terms of democracy and human rights. Yes, it is imperfect, and yes, improvements are needed in many areas in terms of minorities, but it is so much further ahead of many countries in that region. We need to continue to build on that relationship and we need to ensure that the Turks in Canada do not feel that this motion in any way places any culpability on the Turkish people. That is simply a red herring.
On behalf of the vast majority of members in my party, we ought to recognize the historical realities so that our grandchildren and their grandchildren will know that this was the first great genocides, and that we must recognize it in our history if we are to prevent these things from reoccurring in the future.
Sarkis Assadourian Liberal Brampton Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Laval Centre for presenting the motion. This is not the first and it will not be the last. I would hope it would be the last because we have worked on this in the past and we have to get on with debating other issues in the House to do with the Armenian-Turkish relationship. I hope we support this motion and go forward from here.
I want to reflect on the comments made by my colleague from Thunder Bay. He mentioned that Turkey is ready to join the European Union. That is a false statement because Turkey has tried for the last 30 or 40 years to join and every time it has been blocked for many reasons. The first issue was the human rights treatment by the Turkish government against a minority. The second issue was the Kurdish minority treatment. The third issue was the Armenian genocide. The fourth issue was the Cyprus issue. If it does not address these four issues, Turkey will never be a European Union country.
My colleague mentioned that the Turkish constitution is such a fantastic instrument. He may be right, but the Turkish constitution was written after the genocide. No constitution in the world would provide that type of clause. Even the Hitler constitution did not provide for genocide of the Jews. The Rwanda constitution and the Bosnia constitution never provided a clause to kill a minority.
These things are done in the name of national security. Turkey at the time felt that the Armenians were a threat to national security: “Let us eliminate them; let us solve it with a final resolution and get it over with”.
My colleague from the NDP mentioned Iraq, the U.S. and Canada. She is 100% right. We can afford to upset the U.S.A. when we do about $1 billion of trade a day. With Turkey our trade over two years was $1 billion. If we can provoke the U.S. in these conditions, what is the big deal about a so-called provocation with Turkey? Of course we know this whole thing is hot air.
When France passed a resolution two or three years ago, the Turkish ambassador was recalled from Paris to Ankara and six months later he went back. It said it was going to cancel the contract. No contract was cancelled. Therefore the argument is totally false.
My colleague from Thunder Bay mentioned that SNC-Lavalin and the Canadian government are involved in a contract with the Turkish government to provide some 300 rail cars. I have been there long enough, especially on this issue for 25 to 30 years. Three years ago there were discussions that Turkey was going to buy a Candu reactor from us.
Every time there is a motion in the House that this issue is close to a settlement or a final resolution, Turkey comes up with a so-called memorandum of understanding. If anyone believes that Turkey is going to buy these rail cars from Bombardier, good luck. They are really naive to believe that Turkey is going to pay for this. It has no money to pay for its own daily expenses so how could it afford to pay so much money for this kind of fantastic service? Bombardier should know better. That company is being used to provoke the Canadian government to take a stand against the Armenian question.
It was mentioned earlier that we owe it to ourselves to know and recognize the history of this issue. This is not to do with the Turkish government. At the end of the day the relations between the two countries, Turkey and Armenia, will improve because this issue is out of the way.
I have a list of the countries that have recognized the genocide. The most recent one is the Swiss government on December 16, 2003. Others are the Canadian Senate on June 13, 2002; the European parliament assembly on April 24, 2001; the Italian chamber of deputies; the Lebanese parliament; the French national assembly; the Belgian senate; the U.S. House of Representatives; the Argentine senate; and the European parliament. There was a French law in January 20, 2001. Again there is the European parliament; the French national assembly; the Swedish parliament; the council of the European parliament; the Lebanese parliament; the Hellenic parliament; the Russian Duma; the European parliament; the Cyprus parliament; and Uruguay. There was a joint declaration of France, Great Britain and Russia on May 23, 1915 to condemn what happened to the Armenians.
My colleague from Calgary also read a few pages of a book.
I have in my possession a newspaper articles from the Evening Telegram , the Globe and Mail , the London Times and the New York Times . I also have in my possession all the resolutions I read earlier, about 40 or 50 pages, that passed through the parliaments of Canada, the United States and the European parliament. I would ask for the unanimous consent of the House to leave these documents with the clerk for further study.
I remember debating this issue way back. I remember a few years ago there was the Créditiste Party some 30 or 40 years ago. They raised this issue--