Condemnation Abroad, Silence at Home.
The Hypocrisy of U.S. Congress in Recognizing Genocide
By an 2ndrevolution.org contributor
In December 2019, the U.S. Congress took a decisive and long-overdue step by formally recognizing the Armenian Genocide, condemning the atrocities committed by the Ottoman Empire during World War I as a deliberate act of genocide. The decision was praised as a significant moment for historical justice—a symbolic victory for the descendants of the estimated 1.5 million Armenians who were killed between 1915 and 1917. Yet, behind the applause lay a striking inconsistency: a Congress that resolutely condemned Turkey for a century-old atrocity has remained silent when it comes to acknowledging the genocide committed on its own soil against Native Americans.
Genocide Recognition Abroad
The recognition of the Armenian Genocide by Congress was a powerful statement. The massacre and forced deportations of Armenians by the Ottoman government were intended to eradicate a people who were seen as an obstacle in the quest for a homogeneous Turkish nation. This is what makes the U.S. Congress’s position on Armenia particularly significant. The recognition directly addressed Turkey’s denial of the genocide—a denial that has persisted for decades. By calling the systematic extermination of Armenians what it was—a genocide—Congress took a stand against revisionist history and against Turkey’s repeated refusals to acknowledge the past.
The Double Standard of Historical Accountability
Yet, one cannot help but see the glaring double standard at play. While the Armenian Genocide occurred an ocean away, the United States’ own history contains a hauntingly similar story—one of dispossession, forced removal, mass death, and cultural erasure. The systematic extermination and displacement of Native American nations by European settlers, and later by the United States government, fits the criteria of genocide under the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948). The acts committed included the killing of members of Indigenous groups, the causing of serious bodily and mental harm, and the deliberate infliction of conditions intended to destroy these groups, wholly or in part.
From the Trail of Tears, during which thousands of Cherokees and other Native American tribes were forcibly relocated, to the massacres at Sand Creek and Wounded Knee, the United States pursued a deliberate policy of removing Indigenous people from their ancestral lands—whether through warfare, forced relocation, or starvation. The intention was clear: to eliminate the Native American way of life in order to make way for European settlers and the expansion of the United States. By every reasonable definition, this fits the criteria of genocide.
Yet, despite this, the U.S. Congress has never formally acknowledged these acts as genocide. The word “genocide” carries significant political weight—it acknowledges that atrocities were not simply byproducts of colonization or unfortunate consequences of expansion but deliberate actions with the intention to destroy entire communities. This acknowledgment, when applied to Native Americans, is seen by some as an affront to the very narrative that underpins the creation of the United States.
Hypocrisy in Historical Memory
The refusal to acknowledge the genocide against Native Americans while condemning other nations for similar actions is steeped in hypocrisy. It reveals an uncomfortable truth: recognizing the atrocities committed against Native Americans would demand a reckoning with the very foundations of American history. The national myth of pioneers expanding westward in pursuit of manifest destiny is incompatible with the brutal reality that this expansion was only made possible by the mass extermination of the continent’s original inhabitants.
A recognition of Native American genocide would challenge long-held notions of American exceptionalism, a narrative that paints the nation as a beacon of democracy and liberty. It would require an acknowledgment that the United States was, in part, built upon the systematic destruction of other peoples—a narrative that directly contrasts with the ideals many Americans hold dear.
The Armenian Case as a Political Statement
The U.S. Congress’s recognition of the Armenian Genocide was not just a moral stance—it was also a political maneuver. The resolution was passed during a period of diplomatic tension between the United States and Turkey, specifically over Turkey’s incursion into northern Syria and its growing ties with Russia. Recognizing the Armenian Genocide was, in part, a way to criticize and apply pressure on Turkey without directly imposing sanctions. It was an act that had symbolic power but little in the way of practical repercussions for American interests.
By contrast, the acknowledgment of Native American genocide comes with no diplomatic advantage. Instead, it requires a confrontation with the U.S. government’s historical actions and could open the door to demands for reparations, land restitution, or other forms of restitution. It would challenge not a foreign nation but the core myths of American identity, making it a far more politically inconvenient endeavor.
The Role of Public Memory and Narrative Control
The question of why the U.S. Congress has not recognized its own genocide is also tied to the power of public memoryand narrative control. The history taught in American schools often portrays Native American displacement as an inevitable, if tragic, part of the country’s progress. The story of European settlers encountering an “untamed wilderness” and gradually taming it through hard work and sacrifice remains central to the American ethos. To acknowledge that this process was, in reality, marked by deliberate attempts to eradicate Indigenous populations would require a rewriting of that story.
In contrast, recognizing a foreign genocide like the Armenian Genocide does not challenge the core narrative of American exceptionalism. It allows the United States to position itself as a defender of human rights and historical truth, while sidestepping its own unresolved history. This selective recognition of genocide enables the U.S. to criticize others—like Turkey—without holding itself to the same standard.
A Reckoning Still Needed
While the recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the U.S. Congress was a positive step for historical justice, it also highlights the unfinished business that the United States has with its own past. The systematic destruction of Native American communities was a foundational aspect of the country’s expansion, and the refusal to acknowledge this as genocide only perpetuates the injustice.
If the United States truly wishes to be a global leader in recognizing and condemning atrocities, it must start by looking inward and acknowledging the atrocities committed on its own soil. Without that acknowledgment, its condemnations of other nations’ pasts will always ring hollow—a case of demanding accountability abroad while refusing it at home. To move forward, the country must not only recognize these injustices but also work towards meaningful reconciliation with Native American communities, whose resilience against centuries of extermination and marginalization remains an enduring testament to their strength and cultural vitality.