Tweet
THEY DO NOT WANT TO STAND OFF
by Anna Hakobyan
Haykakan Zhamanak
Aug 5 2008
Armenia
It became known yesterday [on 4 August] that the US Senate approved the
candidacy of Marie Yovanovitch for the office of the US ambassador to
Armenia. We have numerously said in the past the Armenian-US relations
were not at their height due to absence of an ambassador to Armenia
and this could not but have had an impact on the quality of relations
in general. However, the US administration seemed not to spare place
for Armenia and did not engage seriously in the issue of having a
plenipotentiary ambassador to Armenia. The [former] ambassador to
Armenia, John Evans, was recalled with the official interpretation
that he had expressed an opinion contradicting the official opinion
of the US administration and made a statement recognizing the Armenian
genocide.
[Passage omitted: reference to candidacy of Richard Hoagland to the
post of the US ambassador to Armenia]
It is noteworthy that Yovanovitch like Richard Hoagland did not
describe "the events" of the 1915 a genocide.
[Passage omitted: description of Yovanovitch's formulation of the
Armenian Genocide, which contained the word "genocide", but said it
is used by the Armenians]
Armenian lobby dissatisfied
Naturally, this response could not content the Armenian lobby and
the senators influenced by it. However, this did not at all hinder
the approval of Yovanovitch's candidacy, and Senator Robert Menendez,
who became a great hero of the Armenian community in the USA, did not
veto her candidacy, as he did two times in Hoagland's case. Meanwhile,
Hoagland's and Yovanovitch's responses are not different in any way -
the Armenian "Medz Yeghern" [Armenian phrase meaning "great genocide"]
expression could not have satisfied the senators, who had demanded
that candidates for the ambassador call the massacres of 1915 a
"genocide". This means that the USA has not had an ambassador to
Armenia for two years not because John Evans pronounced the word
"genocide", and Richard Hoagland did not pronounce this word, and,
moreover, not because the Armenian lobby in the USA and some senators
did not like Richard Hoagland, but only because the US administration
just did not need it.
Time to have an ambassador
Why it was not needed is a separate issue, but a fact remains a fact
that the candidacy of the ambassador has been approved now, which
means, in turn, that a necessity to have an ambassador in Armenia
has emerged finally. This cannot but be directly connected with the
political situation in Armenia.
At the time, when the USA did not have an ambassador and the US
administration did not make special efforts to achieve the opposite
two national elections were rigged in Armenia - the [May 2007]
parliamentary and the [February 2008] presidential, and the 1 March
events [disturbances with casualties] followed the presidential
election.
At present, an autumn of turbulent political developments and
changes is expected in Armenia. And by strange coincidence, the new
US ambassador to Armenia will start her active work in autumn. It
does not follow at all from the abovementioned that Yovanovitch's
coming or not coming to Armenia will anyway influence the course of
developments expected in Armenia. Not at all, this is most likely the
case when the US government just does not want to miss what is going
on - upon necessity, why not, also spreading news that it happened
with the US support and participation.
It is not incidental that a week prior to Yovanovitch's appointment,
she was characterized as a specialist of "coloured revolutions" in
the Azerbaijani press. On the other hand, Russia apparently supports
Armenia's [opposition] Popular Movement and is entirely loyal to
the Armenia government, which is breathing its last breath. No
matter how strange it is, the PACE [Parliamentary Assembly of the
Council of Europe], which decided to give Armenia time till January
[prolonging the term of its resolution, which recommends democratic
reforms in Armenia], unexpectedly tightened its position - speaking
about a deadline in September. It turns out that all of them do not
want to stand off the expected political developments in Armenia,
and when activity and participants emerge around a matter, it means
that the result is near.
by Anna Hakobyan
Haykakan Zhamanak
Aug 5 2008
Armenia
It became known yesterday [on 4 August] that the US Senate approved the
candidacy of Marie Yovanovitch for the office of the US ambassador to
Armenia. We have numerously said in the past the Armenian-US relations
were not at their height due to absence of an ambassador to Armenia
and this could not but have had an impact on the quality of relations
in general. However, the US administration seemed not to spare place
for Armenia and did not engage seriously in the issue of having a
plenipotentiary ambassador to Armenia. The [former] ambassador to
Armenia, John Evans, was recalled with the official interpretation
that he had expressed an opinion contradicting the official opinion
of the US administration and made a statement recognizing the Armenian
genocide.
[Passage omitted: reference to candidacy of Richard Hoagland to the
post of the US ambassador to Armenia]
It is noteworthy that Yovanovitch like Richard Hoagland did not
describe "the events" of the 1915 a genocide.
[Passage omitted: description of Yovanovitch's formulation of the
Armenian Genocide, which contained the word "genocide", but said it
is used by the Armenians]
Armenian lobby dissatisfied
Naturally, this response could not content the Armenian lobby and
the senators influenced by it. However, this did not at all hinder
the approval of Yovanovitch's candidacy, and Senator Robert Menendez,
who became a great hero of the Armenian community in the USA, did not
veto her candidacy, as he did two times in Hoagland's case. Meanwhile,
Hoagland's and Yovanovitch's responses are not different in any way -
the Armenian "Medz Yeghern" [Armenian phrase meaning "great genocide"]
expression could not have satisfied the senators, who had demanded
that candidates for the ambassador call the massacres of 1915 a
"genocide". This means that the USA has not had an ambassador to
Armenia for two years not because John Evans pronounced the word
"genocide", and Richard Hoagland did not pronounce this word, and,
moreover, not because the Armenian lobby in the USA and some senators
did not like Richard Hoagland, but only because the US administration
just did not need it.
Time to have an ambassador
Why it was not needed is a separate issue, but a fact remains a fact
that the candidacy of the ambassador has been approved now, which
means, in turn, that a necessity to have an ambassador in Armenia
has emerged finally. This cannot but be directly connected with the
political situation in Armenia.
At the time, when the USA did not have an ambassador and the US
administration did not make special efforts to achieve the opposite
two national elections were rigged in Armenia - the [May 2007]
parliamentary and the [February 2008] presidential, and the 1 March
events [disturbances with casualties] followed the presidential
election.
At present, an autumn of turbulent political developments and
changes is expected in Armenia. And by strange coincidence, the new
US ambassador to Armenia will start her active work in autumn. It
does not follow at all from the abovementioned that Yovanovitch's
coming or not coming to Armenia will anyway influence the course of
developments expected in Armenia. Not at all, this is most likely the
case when the US government just does not want to miss what is going
on - upon necessity, why not, also spreading news that it happened
with the US support and participation.
It is not incidental that a week prior to Yovanovitch's appointment,
she was characterized as a specialist of "coloured revolutions" in
the Azerbaijani press. On the other hand, Russia apparently supports
Armenia's [opposition] Popular Movement and is entirely loyal to
the Armenia government, which is breathing its last breath. No
matter how strange it is, the PACE [Parliamentary Assembly of the
Council of Europe], which decided to give Armenia time till January
[prolonging the term of its resolution, which recommends democratic
reforms in Armenia], unexpectedly tightened its position - speaking
about a deadline in September. It turns out that all of them do not
want to stand off the expected political developments in Armenia,
and when activity and participants emerge around a matter, it means
that the result is near.