Vote on Armenians seen as slip-up

WASHINGTON -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi found herself in a tight spot last week over her support for a resolution condemning the Ottoman Turks' slaughter of Armenians more than 90 years ago.

Pelosi didn't take President Bush's advice that the resolution would alienate Turkey, a NATO ally that plays a key support role in the war in Iraq. About 70 percent of the U.S. military air cargo entering Iraq goes through Turkey, as do an estimated 3,000 trucks each day.

Turkey, one of America's closest Muslim allies, responded to the resolution by recalling its ambassador to the United States -- a stern diplomatic signal -- and threatening to chill cooperation with America in the region.

The result: Many House members found Bush's argument persuasive and withdrew their support for the resolution. It started with 226 co-sponsors and a solid majority, but so many dropped off that it's now unlikely that Pelosi will even bring it up for a vote.

The drama was an unusual public slip-up for Pelosi, and it has raised questions about her judgment and priorities.

Still, expert Congress watchers say it doesn't outweigh her overall success in holding House Democrats together and getting things done. But the incident sheds light on how House Democrats operate and the difficulties that lie ahead for them.

Pelosi, D-Calif., said she has long supported a resolution on the Armenian genocide. The resolution declared that 1.5 million Armenians were killed in the Ottoman Empire between 1915 and 1923. Turkish leaders acknowledge that many died but deny that there was genocide -- the intentional destruction of an entire people.

Pelosi's spokesman, Brendan Daly, said she didn't try to persuade Democrats to vote for it but left it to each member to decide.

Norman J. Ornstein, a scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said he doesn't fault Pelosi. She didn't orchestrate the vote.

Still, Ornstein conceded, in the end, strong intervention averted "a major foreign policy disaster."

Bill Frenzel of the centrist Brookings Institution, a former Republican congressman from Minnesota, said that all speakers do better in their first year, when members of their party give them special support. Later, committee chairmen flex their muscles and the rank-and-file feel more independent, especially as elections near. Things also could change when Democrats take up more controversial matters, he said.

"So far, the speaker has done well," Frenzel said, "but the job is getting harder every day."