By Endy Zemenides
Last week, during a post debate analysis hosted by the Hellenic American Leadership Council and Greek America Magazine, I was asked “Should we vote as Greek-Americans, or Americans?” While the moderator was actually asking whether we should prioritize issues of exclusive concern to Greek-Americans or wider concerns, some could take this question to insinuate that Greek-Americans are substantially different than other American citizens in terms of their political priorities.

I rejected the distinction that night, and, as a community, it is vital that we begin a dialogue that keeps us fully informed on what role “Greek issues” play in our American political identity. Like most other Americans, Greek-Americans have a variety of issues and interests. Greek-American small business owners may favor one set of policies, Greek-Americans making over $250,000 may favor another. Greek-American seniors may care more about Social Security and the Medicare drug benefit, younger Greek-Americans may care more about the environment and the deficit.

None of the issues above have the potential to unite a Greek-American voting bloc that is as diverse as any. Whether we vary in terms of socio-economic status, naturalized vs. natural born citizenship, occupation type, age or geography, a Greek surname search cannot indicate what the “Greek” position is on taxes, health care, energy or the deficit.

A more reasonable assumption made by politicians and candidates is that Greek-Americans care about and prioritize American policy regarding Greece, Cyprus and the Ecumenical Patriarchate. However, on more than one occasion this year, I have heard Greek-American supporters of McCain justify ignoring Obama/Bidenʼs superior record on Greek issues by saying they are only concerned with “American issues” (without addressing the possibility that if the majority of the American people disagree with them this analysis would make them “un-American”. ) Is it un-American for your vote to depend on American policy on Greek issues? For at least two reasons, the answer to this question is a resounding no.

The first reason we should be the most effective advocates for Greek issues that we can be is because that is what the Founding Fathers envisioned. In one of the most important documents in American history, Federalist Paper Number 10, James Madison argued that a large republic (as established in the United States Constitution) guarded best against the dangers of faction. Madison argued that larger societies will have a greater variety of diverse parties and interest groups, and that competition between them will make it less likely for a majority faction to form. The presence and activities of a distinct Greek-American faction/interest group/lobby performs a vital function for American democracy in that it provides a check on more powerful factions (e.g., Pentagon policy makers) who may be advocating an agenda that does harm to wider American interests.

This brings us to the second reason we should act as an effective Greek-American faction – it is better for American interests. It was not long ago that the United States was considered the undisputed leader of the free world, a shining beacon of hope and promise, a super power that was more inclined to lead by the power of its example rather than by the example of its power. In the last eight years, we have lost our way, steering away from our commitment to the rule of law, casting aside long-standing allies and rewarding new “allies” that conveniently joined a “coalition of the willing” (without any advantage to the U.S.), and abandoning principles on which our republic and our leadership of the free world were based.

Does anyone believe that either American interests or principles are served by a continuing Turkish occupation of Cyprus with American weapons and tacit acquiescence? Cyprus has been a key ally in the war on terror, one of the first nations to allow the U.S. Navy to board Cyprus flagged ships in order to battle proliferation. Cyprusʼ geography is an asset in our Middle East policy, as was proven when American citizens in Lebanon were evacuated to Cyprus during the latest crisis in Lebanon. And the continued presence of over 40,000 Turkish occupation forces (more than the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan) makes Cyprus one of the most heavily militarized areas on Earth, and a potential flashpoint for a shooting war between Greece and Turkey – something that would rip apart the southern flank of NATO and significantly weaken the alliance.

With regard to the Macedonian name issue, the Bush Administration decided to reward its new found ally in Skopje for contributing 80 troops to the Iraq war effort (yes, you read that correctly, EIGHTY) by unilaterally recognizing that country as the “Republic of Macedonia”. In the process, the Bush Administration cast aside the concerns of an ally that was on the same side of the United States in every major conflict of the twentieth century, and displayed a remarkable and dangerous indifference to FYROMʼs irredentism. This action strengthened nationalist factions in FYROM, which not only made an agreement between Athens and Skopje more difficult, but increased tensions between the majority Slavs and minority Albanians in FYROM (and we know how well tensions between Albanians and Slavs have played out in that region). Furthermore, other regional powers concluded that if the United States was content in supporting FYROMʼs irredentism or Kosovoʼs independence, then they could support their own breakaway regions. Russiaʼs actions in South Ossetia this summer are in part an example of “whatʼs good for the goose is good for the gander” consequences of the Bush Administrationʼs actions in the Balkans. Bushʼs “all Iraq, all the time” foreign policy led to shortsighted actions on FYROM, and have left the U.S. exposed not only in the Balkans, but in the Caucuses as well.

Finally, as a country founded on the very principles of religious freedom, standing by as the Turkish government systematically tries to wipe out the oldest Christian church is unconscionable. The U.S. initially became concerned with genocide in the Sudan because it was Christians that were first slaughtered. If the Ecumenical Patriarchate is indeed extinguished as a result of Turkish law and policy, it may lead to a dark age in relations between Islam and Christianity, and such a “clash of civilizations” does not advance American interests in the Middle East, Balkans, Central Asia or anywhere else in the world.

Greek-Americans as a special interest group advocate nothing more and nothing less than an America that properly defines its geostrategic interests and acts consistent with its principles. We want stability in the Mediterranean and the Balkans, the rule of law, and good relations between the Muslim and Christian faiths. Moreover, we have never opposed in principle Turkeyʼs entry into the European Union or FYROMʼs entry into NATO, only that such entry should be conditioned on the acceptance of the principles and policies of those organizations, and respect for and recognition of their allies in those organizations. A secure Greece and a free, unified Cyprus can be strong and effective American allies in the eastern Mediterranean, which is a forward line in the war on terror.

So, on November 4th, vote as a Greek-American; it is the most American thing you can do.

**** Endy Zemenides is the Political Director for IL State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias and a member of the Coordinated Effort of Hellenes.