Tweet
THE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT IS MEANT TO BE DIFFERENT
by Shahan Kandaharian
Aztag Daily
March 23 3009
Lebanon
A lot of topics, interpretations, analyses and predictions are
circulating in the Armenian, American and Turkish media, concerning
the April 24 traditional presidential address by the newly elected
president of the United States.
The core of the issue is the use of the term "genocide" by president
Obama. All the interpretations are around whether the president is
going to keep his pre-election promise or not. The positive indications
are naturally generalized or spread by the Armenian side. And if the
Armenian side is exerting moral pressure on the issue of keeping a
promise, the Turkish side is constantly referring to the military
cooperation and the common political interests of Turkey and the
United States.
If we are to consider the survey of the 'Vivaro' Armenian organization
as an objective one, then we will conclude that the Armenian
organizations and the Armenian public don't share the same viewpoint
on the subject. The results of the survey confirm that the public,
at least those included in the survey, don't believe that the US
president is going to use the term.
The American prominent media representatives with flashy indications
and examples are inclined towards the Turkish stance. According to
them, in this and other related issues, it's an imperative to prefer
the preservation of the US-Turkish relationship, considering the
interests lying in it, both for the state and the whole nation. In
political theories of course this kind of a reception is neither
shocking nor out of the ordinary.
Let us shift our attention from the US media field to the political
and governmental establishments in an attempt to look for certain
indications. First of all, the announcement made by the Democratic
Speaker of Congress Nancy Pelosi is necessarily noteworthy; in
it she didn't resort to any maneuvers to convey the message that
the recognition of the Genocide is a necessity. It's not the first
time that Pelosi is being this clear in expressing her stance on the
matter. The consideration of the time interval is important and gives
an opportunity to make some analysis concerning the restatement of
the viewpoint.
We are now on the threshold of April; we are in the aftermath of
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's visit to Turkey and days
before US president Obama's visit to Ankara. And in a sensitive time
period like this they would have either avoided such announcements or
made maneuvers around it or bluntly restate it. Taking up the third
choice could be considered an indication by the Speaker of Congress,
specially considering the time period in which it occurred. And
although an official date or schedule haven't been assigned yet, a
new resolution has been presented to Congress the contents of which
are almost similar to the previous one.
Certain predictions indicate the possibility of a unique middle-ground
statement by president Obama. There's talk about a none-negating
none-recognizing statement that would cause the same amount of
assurance and unrest to both sides; a statement that's to be different
from the previous ones. After all the president seems to have adopted
a style of being different on all levels.
We wonder what kind of manifestations will this style of
change-restore-be different have on the Armenian matters with
respect to the stances that are to be taken and the announcements
that are to be made. That is the question that has been tormenting
or poking the political mind which is following today's on-going
processes. This style of being different is having manifestations on
other portfolios as well, albeit on a level of mere announcements. It's
very obvious that the new administration has adopted a new style in the
announcements made in the fields of Russian-American, Russian-Iranian
as well as US-Middle East relationships.
The visit of president Obama to Ankara is days away. It's nearer
than his April 24 announcement. In political rationale it's obvious
of course that the use or the avoidance of the term 'genocide'
is going to be decided according to the present indications of the
Armenian-Turkish-US relationships and not by the ethical imperative
of affirming a historical fact. At the same time, however, it's going
to emerge from the president's style of being different as well as
from the president's public commitments and approaches concerning
creating new triggers in the US foreign policy. Hence, also from
today's US interests.
Considering the chosen time intervals, president Obama's visit to
Ankara, in addition to other matters, will set the stage for his
April 24 announcement. The announcement that is meant to be different.
by Shahan Kandaharian
Aztag Daily
March 23 3009
Lebanon
A lot of topics, interpretations, analyses and predictions are
circulating in the Armenian, American and Turkish media, concerning
the April 24 traditional presidential address by the newly elected
president of the United States.
The core of the issue is the use of the term "genocide" by president
Obama. All the interpretations are around whether the president is
going to keep his pre-election promise or not. The positive indications
are naturally generalized or spread by the Armenian side. And if the
Armenian side is exerting moral pressure on the issue of keeping a
promise, the Turkish side is constantly referring to the military
cooperation and the common political interests of Turkey and the
United States.
If we are to consider the survey of the 'Vivaro' Armenian organization
as an objective one, then we will conclude that the Armenian
organizations and the Armenian public don't share the same viewpoint
on the subject. The results of the survey confirm that the public,
at least those included in the survey, don't believe that the US
president is going to use the term.
The American prominent media representatives with flashy indications
and examples are inclined towards the Turkish stance. According to
them, in this and other related issues, it's an imperative to prefer
the preservation of the US-Turkish relationship, considering the
interests lying in it, both for the state and the whole nation. In
political theories of course this kind of a reception is neither
shocking nor out of the ordinary.
Let us shift our attention from the US media field to the political
and governmental establishments in an attempt to look for certain
indications. First of all, the announcement made by the Democratic
Speaker of Congress Nancy Pelosi is necessarily noteworthy; in
it she didn't resort to any maneuvers to convey the message that
the recognition of the Genocide is a necessity. It's not the first
time that Pelosi is being this clear in expressing her stance on the
matter. The consideration of the time interval is important and gives
an opportunity to make some analysis concerning the restatement of
the viewpoint.
We are now on the threshold of April; we are in the aftermath of
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's visit to Turkey and days
before US president Obama's visit to Ankara. And in a sensitive time
period like this they would have either avoided such announcements or
made maneuvers around it or bluntly restate it. Taking up the third
choice could be considered an indication by the Speaker of Congress,
specially considering the time period in which it occurred. And
although an official date or schedule haven't been assigned yet, a
new resolution has been presented to Congress the contents of which
are almost similar to the previous one.
Certain predictions indicate the possibility of a unique middle-ground
statement by president Obama. There's talk about a none-negating
none-recognizing statement that would cause the same amount of
assurance and unrest to both sides; a statement that's to be different
from the previous ones. After all the president seems to have adopted
a style of being different on all levels.
We wonder what kind of manifestations will this style of
change-restore-be different have on the Armenian matters with
respect to the stances that are to be taken and the announcements
that are to be made. That is the question that has been tormenting
or poking the political mind which is following today's on-going
processes. This style of being different is having manifestations on
other portfolios as well, albeit on a level of mere announcements. It's
very obvious that the new administration has adopted a new style in the
announcements made in the fields of Russian-American, Russian-Iranian
as well as US-Middle East relationships.
The visit of president Obama to Ankara is days away. It's nearer
than his April 24 announcement. In political rationale it's obvious
of course that the use or the avoidance of the term 'genocide'
is going to be decided according to the present indications of the
Armenian-Turkish-US relationships and not by the ethical imperative
of affirming a historical fact. At the same time, however, it's going
to emerge from the president's style of being different as well as
from the president's public commitments and approaches concerning
creating new triggers in the US foreign policy. Hence, also from
today's US interests.
Considering the chosen time intervals, president Obama's visit to
Ankara, in addition to other matters, will set the stage for his
April 24 announcement. The announcement that is meant to be different.