Tweet
STANCE IS INVARIABLE, AND THE PROMISE?
Hakob Badalyan
LRAGIR.AM
18:46:24 - 06/04/2009
On April 6, the U.S. president Barak Obama stated in Turkey that his
stance on the Armenian genocide is invariable. Of course, Obama did
not pronounce the word "genocide" but answering a question in this
relation said that his stance is known and it is invariable.
There is nothing unexpected here, because it would be strange if Obama
visited Turkey and stated that his stance was changed. Merely, the
question is whether Obama's electoral promise given to the Armenians
in connection with the genocide recognition is changed or not. Obama
did not say anything in this regard, and probably no one asked.
While the stance and the promise differ. For example, one may have a
stance that toys are good for a child, but one may go back on their
promise on buying a toy because of the crisis. In other words, the
crisis does not change the stance, the toy remains useful for a child,
but the promise of buying it remains unfulfilled because money is
needed for buying something, especially something useful.
Obama sure, is not going to recognize the Armenian genocide by money,
but money is not the only circumstance in the world. In addition,
that the circumstance may be visible and invisible. It is obvious
that there are both of them in regard with the question on the
genocide recognition. For example, the visible circumstance which
may influence the genocide recognition may be the fact that Obama
has already become president, and when he gave the promise he was
not it yet. Another visible circumstance may be the reconstruction
of the Armenian and Turkish border Margara Bridge, or the statements
of the Armenian and Turkish authorities on the progresses in the
Armenian and Turkish relations. Although the progresses are invisible,
instead the statements are visible and, to all appearances, they form
a circumstance which may influence on the Obama's keeping his word.
How many are the visible circumstances and what impact they will have,
will be seen on April 24. Maybe even before. The point is that if
Obama does not pronounce the word "genocide" on April 24, this will
not mean that he did not fulfil his promise. Since, he never stated
to recognize the Armenian genocide on April 24. The recognition may
take place earlier or later. So, until Obama does not recognize the
genocide, he may do that always. Consequently, if the recognition
does not come true on April 24, something should be reviewed in
the American lobby too and after this when hearing promises from the
American presidential candidates we should demand them in written form
where the terms of the genocide recognition should be noted clearly.
Hakob Badalyan
LRAGIR.AM
18:46:24 - 06/04/2009
On April 6, the U.S. president Barak Obama stated in Turkey that his
stance on the Armenian genocide is invariable. Of course, Obama did
not pronounce the word "genocide" but answering a question in this
relation said that his stance is known and it is invariable.
There is nothing unexpected here, because it would be strange if Obama
visited Turkey and stated that his stance was changed. Merely, the
question is whether Obama's electoral promise given to the Armenians
in connection with the genocide recognition is changed or not. Obama
did not say anything in this regard, and probably no one asked.
While the stance and the promise differ. For example, one may have a
stance that toys are good for a child, but one may go back on their
promise on buying a toy because of the crisis. In other words, the
crisis does not change the stance, the toy remains useful for a child,
but the promise of buying it remains unfulfilled because money is
needed for buying something, especially something useful.
Obama sure, is not going to recognize the Armenian genocide by money,
but money is not the only circumstance in the world. In addition,
that the circumstance may be visible and invisible. It is obvious
that there are both of them in regard with the question on the
genocide recognition. For example, the visible circumstance which
may influence the genocide recognition may be the fact that Obama
has already become president, and when he gave the promise he was
not it yet. Another visible circumstance may be the reconstruction
of the Armenian and Turkish border Margara Bridge, or the statements
of the Armenian and Turkish authorities on the progresses in the
Armenian and Turkish relations. Although the progresses are invisible,
instead the statements are visible and, to all appearances, they form
a circumstance which may influence on the Obama's keeping his word.
How many are the visible circumstances and what impact they will have,
will be seen on April 24. Maybe even before. The point is that if
Obama does not pronounce the word "genocide" on April 24, this will
not mean that he did not fulfil his promise. Since, he never stated
to recognize the Armenian genocide on April 24. The recognition may
take place earlier or later. So, until Obama does not recognize the
genocide, he may do that always. Consequently, if the recognition
does not come true on April 24, something should be reviewed in
the American lobby too and after this when hearing promises from the
American presidential candidates we should demand them in written form
where the terms of the genocide recognition should be noted clearly.