Tweet
RECOGNITION OF THE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE - ON THE AGENDA OF THE U.S.
PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN
VARDAN GRIGORYAN
Hayots Ashkhar Daily
Published on June 21, 2008
Armenia
The US House of Foreign Affairs Committee recently held a hearing
devoted to the following topic: `Caucasus: Frozen Conflicts and Closed
Borders'. And the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Senate was engaged
in approving the candidacy of Mary Jovanovich as the new US Ambassador
to Armenia.
It is, undoubtedly, quite easy to see a certain link between the
above-mentioned two discussions which were organized simultaneously,
almost at the same time, because the topics devoted to Armenia were the
pivotal issues included in the agenda of the hearings of both Houses.
Furthermore, the Committees of both the House of Representative and the
Senate held more attractive and fundamental discussions over the
recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the United States.
In that context, both the official viewpoints of the US Republican
Administration were expressed and the proposals of the Democratic
majority of Congress and separate pro-Armenian MPs were advanced
It is noteworthy that on June 19, on the eve of the above-mentioned
hearings and discussions organized by the US legislators, Ken
Khachikyan, Head of the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA),
received a letter from Barrack O'bama.
The candidate of the Democratic Party reconfirmed his previous
statements on the necessity of recognizing the Armenian Genocide,
appealing to the Bush Administration to change the previously adopted
attitudes with regard to the matter. This means that the Democrats are
pushing the recognition of the Armenian Genocide into the agenda of the
pre-election campaign, becoming a target of criticism for the opposing
party and its administration.
It's quite clear why in the explanations given to the US House of
Foreign Affairs Committee Daniel Fried, Under Secretary of State on
European and Eurasian Issues, touched upon the recognition of the
Armenian Genocide and the regulation of the Armenian-Turkish relations.
Moreover, he not only focused on those issues but also revealed the
American `zero variant' of the regulation of the Armenian-Turkish
relations, a topic that was a subject of endless discussions during the
past years.
It consists of two parts.
1. Turkey's putting up with the dark pages of its history
2. Armenia's willingness to recognize the existing borders and not to
demand territories from Turkey.
However, attaching importance to the necessity of `putting up with the
dark pages of history', Daniel Fried avoided answering Congressman
Dyane Watson's question as to why the United States refuses to
recognize the mass killings of the Armenians as Genocide.
The same was repeated in the Senate during the discussions organized on
June 19. In response to the persistent questions of Democrat Robert
Menendez, Mary Jovanovich, candidate for the US Ambassador to Armenia,
characterized the 1915 events as `Great Massacres'; on the other hand,
however, she made an evasive response with regard to the attitudes
adopted by the current administration, saying that `President George
Bush, as well as the former Presidents elected from the two parties did
not recognize the 1915 events as Genocide'.
That's to say, the American diplomat tried `to make it clear' to the
Democrat-Senator that the President of the country rather than she was
responsible for making a decision in that regard. Obviously, this kind
of contradictory answer may serve as grounds for putting a veto on the
candidacy of Mary Jovanovich since the concept `Great Massacres' is one
of the Armenian variants of defining the term `Genocide'. However,
Senator Menendez also touched upon the fact that G. Bush's policy
prevented M. Jovanovich from presenting 1915-1923 events in an exact
manner, i.e. characterizing them as Genocide. In other words, the
Senator revealed the true culprit. Thus, with the help of the Senate
discussions, the Democrats created a political precedent: to touch upon
the recognition of the Armenian Genocide at the most heated moment of
the presidential campaign.
Apart from the `oral' questions asked on June 19, Mary Jovanovich is to
answer the written questions of the Senators as well. One of those
questions has been asked by presidential candidate Barrack O'bama.
Regardless the outcome of the Senate Discussions over the issue of
appointing the new US Ambassador to Armenia, the recognition of the
Armenian Genocide will become a subject of more active debates during
the coming months. The Democrats will try to attract the votes of the
electors while the Republicans will try to act as the defenders of the
American `national interests', reminding all the time of Turkey's
importance for the United States.
Thus, the issue of recognizing the Armenian Genocide is being
consistently included in the agenda of the upcoming debate between B.
O'bama and J. McCain, becoming a powerful tool for the American
diplomacy to use pressure against Turkey. All this can be estimated as
a new and important stage in the process of the international
recognition of the Armenian Genocide.
PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN
VARDAN GRIGORYAN
Hayots Ashkhar Daily
Published on June 21, 2008
Armenia
The US House of Foreign Affairs Committee recently held a hearing
devoted to the following topic: `Caucasus: Frozen Conflicts and Closed
Borders'. And the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Senate was engaged
in approving the candidacy of Mary Jovanovich as the new US Ambassador
to Armenia.
It is, undoubtedly, quite easy to see a certain link between the
above-mentioned two discussions which were organized simultaneously,
almost at the same time, because the topics devoted to Armenia were the
pivotal issues included in the agenda of the hearings of both Houses.
Furthermore, the Committees of both the House of Representative and the
Senate held more attractive and fundamental discussions over the
recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the United States.
In that context, both the official viewpoints of the US Republican
Administration were expressed and the proposals of the Democratic
majority of Congress and separate pro-Armenian MPs were advanced
It is noteworthy that on June 19, on the eve of the above-mentioned
hearings and discussions organized by the US legislators, Ken
Khachikyan, Head of the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA),
received a letter from Barrack O'bama.
The candidate of the Democratic Party reconfirmed his previous
statements on the necessity of recognizing the Armenian Genocide,
appealing to the Bush Administration to change the previously adopted
attitudes with regard to the matter. This means that the Democrats are
pushing the recognition of the Armenian Genocide into the agenda of the
pre-election campaign, becoming a target of criticism for the opposing
party and its administration.
It's quite clear why in the explanations given to the US House of
Foreign Affairs Committee Daniel Fried, Under Secretary of State on
European and Eurasian Issues, touched upon the recognition of the
Armenian Genocide and the regulation of the Armenian-Turkish relations.
Moreover, he not only focused on those issues but also revealed the
American `zero variant' of the regulation of the Armenian-Turkish
relations, a topic that was a subject of endless discussions during the
past years.
It consists of two parts.
1. Turkey's putting up with the dark pages of its history
2. Armenia's willingness to recognize the existing borders and not to
demand territories from Turkey.
However, attaching importance to the necessity of `putting up with the
dark pages of history', Daniel Fried avoided answering Congressman
Dyane Watson's question as to why the United States refuses to
recognize the mass killings of the Armenians as Genocide.
The same was repeated in the Senate during the discussions organized on
June 19. In response to the persistent questions of Democrat Robert
Menendez, Mary Jovanovich, candidate for the US Ambassador to Armenia,
characterized the 1915 events as `Great Massacres'; on the other hand,
however, she made an evasive response with regard to the attitudes
adopted by the current administration, saying that `President George
Bush, as well as the former Presidents elected from the two parties did
not recognize the 1915 events as Genocide'.
That's to say, the American diplomat tried `to make it clear' to the
Democrat-Senator that the President of the country rather than she was
responsible for making a decision in that regard. Obviously, this kind
of contradictory answer may serve as grounds for putting a veto on the
candidacy of Mary Jovanovich since the concept `Great Massacres' is one
of the Armenian variants of defining the term `Genocide'. However,
Senator Menendez also touched upon the fact that G. Bush's policy
prevented M. Jovanovich from presenting 1915-1923 events in an exact
manner, i.e. characterizing them as Genocide. In other words, the
Senator revealed the true culprit. Thus, with the help of the Senate
discussions, the Democrats created a political precedent: to touch upon
the recognition of the Armenian Genocide at the most heated moment of
the presidential campaign.
Apart from the `oral' questions asked on June 19, Mary Jovanovich is to
answer the written questions of the Senators as well. One of those
questions has been asked by presidential candidate Barrack O'bama.
Regardless the outcome of the Senate Discussions over the issue of
appointing the new US Ambassador to Armenia, the recognition of the
Armenian Genocide will become a subject of more active debates during
the coming months. The Democrats will try to attract the votes of the
electors while the Republicans will try to act as the defenders of the
American `national interests', reminding all the time of Turkey's
importance for the United States.
Thus, the issue of recognizing the Armenian Genocide is being
consistently included in the agenda of the upcoming debate between B.
O'bama and J. McCain, becoming a powerful tool for the American
diplomacy to use pressure against Turkey. All this can be estimated as
a new and important stage in the process of the international
recognition of the Armenian Genocide.