Z'areh Posted June 20, 2008 Report Share Posted June 20, 2008 The US administration, through the new US ambassador designate, Mrs. Yavanovitch, has somewhat softened the stance of its anti-Armenian policy of not recognizing the genocide outright, but Yovanovitch, has essentially described a case of genocide without using the word. At least in outward appearance she comes across as more "understanding" (her words) than Bush's first nominee Mr. Hoagland. One thing she has said that cannot be disputed is that the policy of the decision to use the politically charged word "genocide" remains within the jurisdiction of the president of the United States and his administration, and that an ambassador cannot form or change a foreign policy. The pro-Armenian US public officials then have to decide whether to block all ambassadorial nominations with the hopes that one day this policy will change and wait, or regard Mrs Yovanovitch's "softer" stance as a way out from this polarization. I would just like to bring to your attention that, at the time of the nomination of Mr. John Evans as the Armenia's new ambassador, had these same Senator and his congressional colleagues put Mr. Evans on the spot for recognizing the Armenian "tragedy" as genocide, he too would have been blocked and eventually replaced. I personally think that the point has been made, and it is of no use to deprive Armenia from an important ambassadorial position. Let's call the blocking of Mr. Hoagland, who indeed was arrogant in his views, as victory and close this chapter. Things might, or might not, change if Obama becomes president. But what would be even more effective if the new ambassador, after a few years of service in Yerevan, also comes to a firm understanding of the reality of the Armenian genocide and expresses such personal views on the matter. If Obama, as promised, does respect his pledge of officially recognizing the Armenian genocide, any US ambassador previously posted by president Bush will have to adjust to the new rules and called it a genocide, this would also apply to the ambassadors of Turkey and Azerbaijan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sip Posted June 21, 2008 Report Share Posted June 21, 2008 How about instead of G recognition we start saying "Gecognition" or "recoGnition" ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yervant1 Posted July 14, 2008 Report Share Posted July 14, 2008 M. JOVANOVICH REPLIES TO THE QUESTIONS Hayots Ashkhar Daily Published on July 12, 2008 Armenia Mary Jovanovich, candidate of the US Ambassador to Armenia, has replied to the written questions of US Presidential candidate Barrack O'bama. These questions formed part of the hearings organized by the US House of Foreign Affairs Committee on June 19. In response to B. O'bama's written question concerning the Armenian Genocide, M. Jovanovich said, `The US Government and certainly I grieve over the mass killings, ethnic cleansings and deportations which deprived 1.5 million Armenians of life in the final era of the existence of the Ottoman Empire. The United States of America considers these events as the greatest tragedy of the 20th century, `Great Massacres', as many Armenians are wont to say. When remembering about that dark page of history, I deeply understand the grief and sufferings experienced by the Armenian people in those times and now, and I have respect for the American-Armenian community and the Armenian people who are making all the possible efforts towards seeing their grief and loss recognized.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.