Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Whole Truth Is Told To A Jackass Only

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Whole Truth Is Told To A Jackass Only

    THE WHOLE TRUTH IS TOLD TO A JACKASS ONLY
    HAKOB BADALYAN

    http://www.lragir.am/src/index.php?id=co mments&pid=15044
    12:01:38 - 02/09/2009

    The governmental heralds who participate in debates and discussions on
    the Armenian-Turkish issue who usually are not governmental political
    figures but so-called independent political scientists, listening to
    whom one understands that they do not want to explain the phenomenon
    but only say "good, good, very good", have adopted a very interesting
    attitude. The peculiarity of this attitude is that these people try
    to present the issue from the angle that whoever speaks against the
    strategy the government is against the opening of the Armenian and
    Turkish border. This is typical of the Armenian governmental and
    pro-governmental thinking to change notions, diviate from the topic
    and turn the debate into trivial arguments.

    Meanwhile everyone understands that the axis of the criticism of
    the process of the Armenian and Turkish relations is not the demand
    not to open the border. The main topic of the criticism is at what
    price, at whose expense it will be done, what Armenia has to give in
    return for opening the border, and whether this price is equal to the
    result expected from opening the border. Or whether the Turks are not
    using the issue of the border to manipulate the Armenians during the
    negotiations. This is the problem and not the open or closed border
    as the governmental heralds are trying represent, saying that the
    process is important. But do they explain how Armenia benefits from
    this process and what it loses? Do they say what form the process has
    to have? Or maybe they do not care about the form, the important is
    to have it, even if Armenia appears as an "outsider" in this process.

    It does not seem hard to understand that the discussion must be on
    this issue rather than the fact that an open border is better than a
    closed one, or it is better to negotiate than not to negotiate. Of
    course, an open border is better than a closed one and negotiation
    is better than its absence. But the best solution is to think before
    negotiations whether they cannot be used as a trap against you. The
    problem of the governmental heralds should be to explain to the
    society that there is no trap. Let the heralds explain that the setup
    of the sub-commission will not deal with the genocide issue, but they
    will study only historical documents and facts not relating to the
    genocide. Let the government heralds clarify this issue and not say
    that the word genocide lacks in the protocols so everything is good.

    Let them explain to the public the reason why Armenia and Turkey
    draft a protocol to establish relations and include in it the
    provision of recognition of state borders of the two countries as
    well as a provision on "respect of inviolability of the borders
    of other countries". What do the Armenian and Turkish relations
    have in common with other countries? Does this provision imply
    Azerbaijan? Let the governmental heralds explain this and not the
    fact that Artsakh is not mentioned in the protocol. Finally, let
    the governmental heralds know the famous saying "the whole truth is
    told to a jacjass only'. Moreover, in diplomacy the whole truth is
    never said, especially in such delicate questions as the Armenian
    and Turkish relations. Consequently, a politician has to be able to
    read between the lines because an ordinary citizen may read the lines
    without the help of any politician. They should not take the citizens
    for uneducated people or idiots. A political scientist should read
    between the lines.
Working...
X