Latest:

Obama Commemorates ‘Meds Yeghern’ with Statement

Below is the full text of the statement issued by President Barack Obama on Armenian Remembrance Day, April 24, 2013. To read the ANCA’s response click here.

Today we commemorate the Meds Yeghern and honor those who perished in one of the worst atrocities of the 20th century.  Ninety-eight years ago, 1.5 million Armenians were massacred or marched to their deaths in the final days of the Ottoman Empire.  We pause to reflect on the lives extinguished and remember the unspeakable suffering that occurred.   In so doing, we are joined by millions across the world and in the United States, where it is solemnly commemorated by our states, institutions, communities, and families.   We also remind ourselves of our commitment to ensure that such dark chapters of history are not repeated.

I have consistently stated my own view of what occurred in 1915, and my view has not changed.  A full, frank, and just acknowledgement of the facts is in all of our interests.  Nations grow stronger by acknowledging and reckoning with painful elements of the past, thereby building a foundation for a more just and tolerant future.  We appreciate this lesson in the United States, as we strive to reconcile some of the darkest moments in our own history.   We recognize those courageous Armenians and Turks who have already taken this path, and encourage more to do so, with the backing of their governments, and mine.

The history and legacy of the Armenian people is marked by an indomitable spirit, and a great resiliency in the face of tremendous adversity and suffering.  The United States is stronger for the contributions Armenian-Americans have made to our society, our culture, and our communities.  In small measure we return that contribution by supporting the Armenian people as they work toward building a nation that would make their ancestors proud: one that cherishes democracy and respect for human liberty and dignity.

Today we stand with Armenians everywhere in recalling the horror of the Meds Yeghern, honoring the memory of those lost, and affirming our enduring commitment to the people of Armenia.

79 Comments on Obama Commemorates ‘Meds Yeghern’ with Statement

  1. avatar gaytzag palandjian // April 24, 2013 at 10:53 am // Reply

    Regardless of his acknowledgeing with the word Genocide(which implies legal consequences ….)Armenians have to make a huge effort and have another 20 countries or more do so.

  2. avatar Dicran M. Doumanian // April 24, 2013 at 11:33 am // Reply

    Obama still refuses to use the word “genocide’ or pressure the Turks to admit to the genocide.

  3. avatar Hachik Chilingirian // April 24, 2013 at 11:52 am // Reply

    The statement is very good, but the “G” word is still missing. And we have to be unrealistic to expect it to be used. Politics is not a fair game.

  4. Mr. President,

    May I remind you that your consistently stated personal view of what occurred in 1915, which, as you say, has not changed, held that “the Armenian Genocide was not an allegation, a personal opinion, or a point of view, but rather a widely documented fact supported by an overwhelming body of historical evidence.”

    May I also remind you that you have made an unambiguous promise to recognize, as President, the Armenian Genocide not the Meds Yeghern, an adjectival phrase that only Armenians narrowly use as synonymous to genocide, but which tells nothing about the Turkish crime of genocide to the American public and, as such, bears no legal repercussions.

    May I also remind you and your ill-informed administration advisors as well that the year 1915 was not “the final days of the Ottoman Empire”. The Ottoman Empire officially dissolved in 1923.

    And one last thing, SHAME on you!

  5. It was GENOCIDE before he was elected,now it’s MEDZ YEGHERN,When are you going to stand by the truth Mr. President.

    • Maybe we should hold up a card stating what he said before he became a president. And have him read it back

  6. avatar mike terzian // April 24, 2013 at 1:53 pm // Reply

    mr.president thank you for taking the time to remember the tragedy
    of the armenian people but the word genocide was replaced by meds yeghern which only armenians undrestand ,on the other hand by not using the word genocide which wouls/ve been undrestood by the entire
    world & sorry to say but you came up short..

  7. No ” G ” word..= A H , No guts no air medals.

  8. He just copied and pasted the same speech he’s given since 2009. He’s nothing but a treacherous, spineless imbecile who in striving to please everyone pleases no one.

  9. Wish we had many more such politicians who bravely acknowledge the gonocide.Other politicians and admnistrative officials take note.

  10. Abraham Lincoln died for his ideals. He knew very well that if slavery continued, there would be an economic loss, but he put freedom of African Slaves above monetary considerations. He stood for the principles of truth and righteousness and strove to create and everlasting peace amongst the citizens of the United states of A

  11. Who am I to dream that one day there could be peace amongst all nations? Just an Armenian Citizen of the USA, who voted for President Obama, believing him to fulfill his promise and obligations to the Armenian People, not just to use us to get elected and then forget about us like the trash he treated us like today. The Turks threw our dead away. President Obama, u just threw my heart and hopes away. Shame on Turkey. Pity to this land of the free.

  12. But I am an Armenian Attorney who will never give up and instead of responding to our Genocide as a legal dodge, I will make sure History is Never Forgotten and the Armenian Genocide is in all history books in every nation.

  13. avatar Annie Saatjian // April 24, 2013 at 9:07 pm // Reply

    I want to hear clearly the word “Genocide”. Anything different is playing with words once again. The statement issued is just a repetition of what I’ve been hearing the last few years.

  14. Mr. President: Ivoted for you because I was sure that you understood history ans was aware of armenian Genocide. You promised the Armenian Americans that U.S. Government would recognize Turkish shameful crimes. The germans could have prevented it, the British could have kept the Historic Armenian land (Eastern Anotolia)to Armenians. Woodraw Wilson even drew a map including Armenia proper but took the back seat and watched the dismantling of a historic nation and kept on his wilsonian doctrine to enhance the US supremacy over all other nations, erradication of the common people on behalf of elite as they were the only ones who were entitled for agood life. I was discouraged that you called this heinous crime “an atrocity”. Another genocide is already underway by the present thug in Turkey agaist the Kurdish people. They are being driven out of south-eastern Turkey the war Armenians at first were being kicked out. The Turks once sold out short and will do it again unless you stop this lunacy. Then of-course we need Turkey and Israel as henchmen for our Imperial global interests.

  15. Armenians acting like silly, little children with bad priorities and no understanding of the world they live in. Watch now how our “democracy” advocates will continue taking their orders from Washington.

    • Do you have proof that these brave Armenians take orders from Washington? Or is it just a recycling of the trash circulated by Putin’s propaganda machine? At least they are not taking orders from Russia and selling the country to them wholesale.

    • Do you have any proof that your loser Barevaloser did not lose massively to duly elected President of Armenia Serj Sargsyan ?
      Aren’t you barevcadres constantly spreading disinformation about Armenia and Armenia’s elected leaders ?
      Didn’t you falsely claim that Serj Sargsyan and Robert Kocharyan, are, quote, “Azerbaijani citizens” ?
      Do you have any proof ?

    • Well, they are Azerbaijani citizens. They were born in Azerbaijan, work against the interests of Armenia, and barely speak Armenian. Many Armenians actually think they may be (at least partially) ethnic Azeris.
      .
      Do you (Avery) have any proof that Serzh won? The official government results do not count, because the government itself lacks credibility. In the absence of credibility, you have to go with Raffi.

    • Well, no, buddy boy, they were not and are not Azerbaijani citizens. They were not born in Azerbaijan: they were born in Stepanakert, NKAO. aka Artsakh.
      And I could educate you about the non-existence of the concept of ‘Azerbaijani citizenship’ when Serj Sargsyan and Robert Kocharyan were born, but it would be wasted effort: obviously my previous attempts to educate you have failed utterly.
      {Many Armenians actually think they may be (at least partially) ethnic Azeris}: Suuure; is that the same many ‘Armenians’ who supposedly think they are, quote, ‘separatists’? Suuure they are ‘Azeris’: that’s why they fought the AzeriTatarTurk invaders and thre them out.
      btw: after all this time, have you been able to dig up any other ‘Armenians’ who think, like you, that our Artsakhtsi brothers and sisters are, quote, ‘separatists’ ?
      And yes, I, Avery, have proof that President Serj Sargsyan won 58% to 37%: a landslide win of 21 points. The proof is self evident: President Sargsyan is recognized as the duly elected president by USA, UK, France, Russia, Germany,…..all the major powers of the world. That’s the bonus. On top of the fact that all other fundamental empirical and actual evidence proves Raffi Hovannisian lost, and lost badly.
      And you can go with the Barvaloser all the way if you so choose: all the way over the cliff, shouting Mnak Barov (hat tip to Mr. Mensoian)

    • Vahagn, there was no such a thing as “Azerbaijani citizens” at the time Kocharyan and Sargsyan were born. Not that they are the light of my eyes, but please stop the rubbish. All were Soviet citizens. And they don’t “barely” speak Armenian. Maybe their language is not very rich and eloquent, but have you heard the language Armenia-born oligarchs speak? You’ll cry your eyes out. Being born outside the Armenian SSR but still within the USSR didn’t necessarily make one anti-Armenian. Whose influence agent do you think Raffi Hovannisian is?

    • Avery, kiddo, yes, they were born in Azerbaijan, just as anyone born in the Armenian SSR was born in Armenia. And after Azerbaijan’s independence they became Azeri citizens, just as those born in the Armenian SSR became citizens of Armenia.
      .
      The congratulations of foreign leaders is not evidence of winning, it’s an evidence of Serzh bending over and selling out his country to foreign powers.

    • Petros, let’s first stop the rubbing of engaging in conspiracy theories of whose “agent of influence” Raffi is, and let’s stop the rubbing of using invented therms like “agent of influence” usually used by regimes opposed to democracy.
      .
      Yes, Robert and Serzh are illiterate just like the oligarchs. Whether they are legally or figuratively Azeri citizens is not something I am concerned about. Giving them the benefit of exact legal concepts is something they do not deserve. After what they have done to Armenia, calling them Azeri citizens is pure favor. They are anti-Armenian not because they were born outside of Armenia, but because they have been destroying Armenia from within.

    • avatar Vahagn // May 2, 2013 at 3:24 am //

      Errata: “rubbish”, not “rubbing”

    • avatar gayane // May 2, 2013 at 3:42 am //

      have to say.. our president of Armenia has and continues to sell our country to other powers block by block, company by company.. pretty soon we will have nothing to own in our own country… it is very very heartbreaking, disturbing and real…

      in addition, not that our present or former presidents im achqi luysnen…and i can’t stand the fact that they have not stepped into the “lets stand strong together and as one”… to this day…cant blame them 100% either.. even though in order to create strong country with strong people, they need to respect and show progress to their own people and within their cabinet and start modernizing and acting like true leaders day by day..

    • Vahagn –

      Please stop the disinformation. ‘Agent of influence’ is not an “invented term usually used by regimes opposed to democracy”. Here are the U.S. government definitions of ‘agent of influence’ (source: Wikipedia):

      – An agent of some stature who uses his or her position to influence public opinion or decision making to produce results beneficial to the country whose intelligence service operates the agent (Air Force Office of Special Investigations Manual 71-142)
      – A person who is directed by an intelligence organization to use his position to influence public opinion or decision-making in a manner that will advance the objective of the country for which that organization operates (Counterintelligence Glossary-Terms & Definitions of Interest for Department of Defense Counterintelligence Professionals)
      – An individual who acts in the interest of an adversary without open declaration of allegiance and attempts to exercise influence covertly, but is not necessarily gathering intelligence or compromising classified material, is known as an agent of influence (Historical Dictionary of Cold War Counterintelligence)

      “Whether Robert and Serzh are legally or figuratively Azeri citizens is not something I am concerned about.”

      Well, you should. You chose to post a comment in a public forum that contains a glaring falsehood. There was no such a thing in the Soviet Union as citizen of a union or autonomous republic. Therefore, no one who was born in the Azerbaijani SSR was citizen of Azerbaijan. All Soviet people were citizens of the USSR.

      What Kocharyan or Sargsyan deserve or not deserve is irrelevant to legal concepts that you deliberately distort.

    • Vahagn, sonny boy:

      This is what you wrote:
      {Precisely. And since the NKR is not even recognized by Armenia, Robert and Serzh are Azerbaijani citizens. Call me biased, but I would rather have a U.S. citizen president of Armenia than an Azeri citizen.} (Vahagn March 11, 2013 @AW)

      Let us emphasize what you wrote: {“ Robert and Serzh are Azerbaijani citizens”}.
      Fact check: as Petros noted above, there was no such thing as, quote, Azerbaijani _citizen_ when Serj Sargsyan and Robert Kocharyan were born.
      They were Citizens of USSR. Got that ?
      You are either hopelessly uninformed or are deliberately disseminating Anti-Armenian disinformation: guess which I think you are.
      I am sure you can find, if you really try hard, a passport that says: “Citizen of Azerbaijan SSR”.
      Keep trying, sonny boy: keep digging yourself deeper.
      And no, they were not born in Azerbaijan SSR: they were born in Nagorno-Karabagh Autonomous Oblast; that is why it was called NKAO.
      What part of NKAO don’t you understand after my repeated attempts to educate you.

      Citizen of USSR. Citizen of USSR. Keep repeating. You will get it. Eventually. I am sure. Really sure.

    • Petros, please stop the disinformation by calling Raffi an “agent of influence. I never stated that Serzh and Robert were Azeri citizens when they were born, nor did I say that “agent of influence” is exclusively used by authoritarian regimes. And please stop deliberately distorting others’ posts.
      .
      There is no “glaring falsehood” about stating that Serzh and Robert are Azerbaijani citizens. They were born in Azerbaijan, and they were Azeri citizens when Azerbaijan became independent. If you disagree, that is your opinion, and yes, I can choose whatever opinion I wish to express about a public figure, depending on how much respect they deserve. It is my god-given and U.S.-recognized right.
      .
      And just because the phrase “agent of influence” appears in a few obscure Cold-War era U.S. sources does not mean it is used in the U.S. or in any free society. It would be highly controversial in a free society to call someone an “agent of influence,” as it would run against the very concept of free speech. Anyone, after all, could be called an agent of influence without any evidence if they said something not inline with the official view. It is a meaningless term which is routinely used by dictatorial regimes such as Serzh’s and Putin’s, and their anti-democratic supporters, such as you, to discredit any reformist who tries to democratize an authoritarian country.

    • avatar Vahagn // May 3, 2013 at 3:49 pm //

      NKAO, buddy boy, was an indivisible part of Azerbaijan. And Robert and Serzh, having been born in Azerbijan, attained Azerbaijani citizenship after Azerbaijan became independent. Got it?
      .
      And it is funny watching someone defend two illegitimate officials of Armenia, when the same person refers to our people as “sheep” and blames the Genocide victims for the Genocide: (quote by Avery): “no wonder we were slaughtered like sheep by Turks. Turks glorify their military, while we glorify our spoiled brats.”
      http://armenianweekly.com/2013/02/23/a-story-of-defiance-activists-reject-international-observers-assessment-of-election/
      I don’t know what you mean by “digging a hole,” I am just throwing peanuts and watching a monkey get excited.

  16. If the English-speaking President of the English-speaking country, the United States of America, decides to use a borrowed word in his English-language proclamation addressed to his English-speaking citizens, then what difference for these English-speaking citizens does it make whether a proclamation contains one weirdly-sounding word MEDZ YEGHERN or another weirdly-sounding word TSEGHASPANUTYUN? No, seriously, if our President so likes borrowed words in the case when there is a legal English equivalent, then why not use “tseghaspanutyun” instead of “medz yeghern”?! After all, both words tell nothing to his English-speaking American public. To whom these proclamations are addressed in Obama’s capacity as President of the United States? To the American people or to Armenian-Americans only? If they are addressed to Armenian-Americans only who understand that “medz yeghern” is synonymous to genocide yet bears no similar semantic connotation, then Barack Obama is the President of which country? Armenia?

  17. Honestly I am not so disconcerted by this statement as it does state the facts of death and murder and the numbers of people killed. Yes, it must be acknowledged as genocide, but I also read in there an encouragement for this acknowledgement.

    For me it is overshadowed by the news cycle yesterday that this loony uncle of the terrorists managed to implant a story about an “Armenian” named “Misha” who influenced those kids — without SINGLE WORD as background of the date of the anniversary of genocide against a Christian nation, nor the historical facts on the ground of the Chechen jihadist merceneries who fight all over the region including in Artsakh.

  18. PS I was disappointed even that I didn’t see a single poster or sign held up behind Wolf Blitzer as he kept trying to broadcast this self-serving story in the heart of Boston (as if single handedly CNN was going to capture some “leader”). Even congressman McCaul said it was irresponsible to suggest before the FBI and other agencies investigate that it was some purely home-grown incident without ties abroad.

  19. The “president” of Armenia, Serzh, says it’s ok to say Mets Yeghern INSTEAD of Genocide, thus backstabbing the efforts of the Diaspora. And we are expecting more from the President of the United States?
    .
    This is what happens when we have no democracy in Armenia. This is one example of how its government, lacking the legitimacy of its people, works against the interests and the wishes of our nation.

    • Vahagn,

      That the president of Armenia serves the interests of behind-the-scene globalist manipulators in order to stay in power and enrich himself, most of us know. But the US president is also a marionette in the hands of the same structures, for example, the Council of Foreign Relations.

      The difference being that the current president has unambiguously stated that as president he would recognize the Armenian Genocide. That is why we had (no longer have, I sense) expectations that he’d keep his promise. The issue of democracy is irrelevant to this situation. You remember, I hope, that when large masses of the American people poured into the streets of many US cities demanding end of the US invasion in and withdrawal of troops from Iraq, your “democratically-elected” US president—whoever he was or is or will be—could care less about this outrage of the majority of his citizens.

      The biggest flaw of your comments, as I said before, is your unjustifiably excessive good opinion and aggrandizement of the American democracy. One can spend days submitting hard evidence in an attempt to dissuade you from such an extreme, all the same, you hang tough on it, in Arm.: du qo eshn es qshum. With time, it becomes boring, my friend.

    • John, in the beginning of the Iraqi war, the U.S. protesters were a small minority of the population. The majority of the people were angry after 9/11 and supported the invasion. The Congress almost unanimously voted to support the invasion. Yes, later the proportion of the anti-war segment increased, but just because the president did not follow their demands does not mean there is no democracy. Democracy does not have to be a direct democracy constantly following the demands of protesters. That is why you have elections, and with the 2006 and especially 2008 elections, the anti-war forces gained power, eventually leading to the withdrawal of troops.
      .
      We have debated before regarding your conspiracist views on the U.S. democracy. I was not persuaded with your evidence, and I chose to agree to disagree. You, on the other hand, tend to grow hostile with someone who disagrees with you. That is our difference.
      .
      Even if we agree that both the U.S. and Armenian presidents are controlled by global forces, the U.S. president still has to be concerned about the next elections, or the voters will elect the next guy. Armenia’s president, on the other hand, can afford to make statements and policies diametrically opposed to the loud wishes of the people, because he can easily rig the elections. This makes him even a greater puppet than, say, Obama. Therefore, while we can disagree about the extent to which democracy matters, it cannot be logically said that it is wholly irrelevant. It gives an extra protection against the foreign pressures.

    • Vahagn. please carefully choose words. No country went to “war” with the United States, more so Iraq.

      The majority of the people was indeed angry after 9/11 and supported the invasion because their government lied to them to the effect that there was a connection between Al-Qaeda and Iraq, between the hijackers and Iraq, and that there was a proven existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

      When the majority of the American people found out that they’ve been lied to, they demanded cessation of war and withdrawal of US troops. These were not just “protesters”, these were US voters who gave Bush the vote of confidence in 2000. In 2004, Bush’s re-election year and throughout his second term, his rating was, possibly, one of the lowest America has seen in her history. Yet, somehow, with all the negativism he garnered from his people, the guy was miraculously re-elected in 2004. Thought-provoking, isn’t it?

      In a democracy the majority rules, doesn’t it? And the government ought to act accordingly, right? Withdrawal of troops started not because the anti-war majority of the citizens gained power, but because the US mission in Iraq, whatever it was, might have come to a conclusion. Yet, instead of bringing Bush to trial on charges of national treason and for lying to the American people, he was allowed to live in freedom and is even allowed to open his presidential library!

      Further, my view on the U.S. democracy is not “conspiracist”. I’m tired of repeating the same thing over and over again. If the term so soothes your ears, at least use ‘conspirological’ instead of ‘conspiracist’. I don’t grow hostile with someone who disagrees with me. I just continue the debate. If you wish, we can discontinue it altogether.

      You say “the U.S. president still has to be concerned about the next elections, or the voters will elect the next guy.” Yes, personally he may, but you fail to understand that the next guy is one out of the same deck of cards. Essentially, high above the personal level, it doesn’t really matter who the president is, because he, his contender or the next guy are from the same cohort.

      About Armenia’s president rigging the elections. Almost certainly, he does. But has it ever occurred to you if he might be allowed to do so by the same globalist forces? Their goal is to have subservient, controllable presidents. Otherwise, why wouldn’t they refuse to accept the election results knowing they’ve been rigged?

      Again, democracy has absolutely nothing to do in both cases.

    • john, please carefully read other’s posts before starting to type and telling others to be careful. I never said Iraq went to war with the U.S.
      .
      No, democracy is not “majority rule,” it’s an oversimplified definition used by conspiracists such as you to try to discredit it. Democracy in it’s modern, representative form is a rule by a tiny minority (Congress, president) elected by a majority, subject to restrictions on majority, such as human rights, checks and balances etc. Elected officials do not have to follow every demand of the people, but again, if they do not, they run the risk of not being elected next time.
      .
      Bush was elected in 2004 for the simple explanation that the country was still at war, the civil war had not started, and there was still hope that the U.S. mission in Iraq (to democratize the country) would work. The majority therefore choose not to change leadership in the middle of the war. Plus, Kerry was a weak, flip-flopping candidate. Again, there is an obvious, simple explanation, not the convoluted one suggested by conspiracists. And Bush was not brought to trial perhaps because the elected officials did not want to divide the country even further.
      .
      Even assuming you are right about two candidates belonging to the same “cabal,” for which you obviously have no evidence, the incumbent would still have to worry about the public’s vote if he chose to ignore the public’s wishes. It is the natural tendency of any official to try to keep his power, and he would not want to lose his power to the other guy, even if the other guy belonged to the same “cabal.”
      .
      Yes, Armenia’s elections are rigged with the consent of foreign powers. That is why it is imperative for Armenia to become a democracy, which is the only way to maintain its independence. After all, it is easier to manipulate one tyrant than an 3 million people.
      .
      It is you who expressed frustration about having to repeat your conspiracist views with me, and therefore I told you that I chose to agree to disagree with you. If you still want to keep at discussing your views with me, I do not care one way or the other.

    • avatar Vahagn // May 4, 2013 at 7:17 pm //

      For some reason my reply was not posted. Since there were some important points, I will retype those points.
      .
      Democracy is not “majority rule,” it’s an oversimplified definition, and it actually describes tiranny of majority, something that was rejected by modern representative democracies such as the U.S. I have observed that the oversimplified phrase is for some reason used by conspiracists to discredit the idea of democracy as a whole. Democracy in it’s modern, representative form is a rule by a tiny minority (Congress, president) elected by a majority, subject to restrictions on the majority, such as human rights, checks and balances etc. Elected officials do not have to follow every demand of the people, but again, if they do not, they run the risk of not being elected next time.
      .
      We may have different explanations as to why Bush was reelected. To me, the simpler explanation supported by the obvious facts is that the country was still at war, the civil war in Iraq had not entered it’s truly furious stage, and there was still hope that the U.S. mission in Iraq (to democratize the country) would work. The majority therefore choose not to change leadership in the middle of the war. Plus, Kerry was a weak, flip-flopping candidate. And Bush was not brought to trial perhaps because the elected officials did not want to divide the country even further.
      .
      Even assuming you are right about two candidates belonging to the same “cabal,” for which you obviously have no evidence, the incumbent would still have to worry about the public’s vote if he chose to ignore the public’s wishes. It is the natural tendency of any official to try to keep his power, and he would not want to lose his power to the other guy, even if the other guy belonged to the same “cabal.”
      .
      Yes, Armenia’s elections are rigged with the consent of foreign powers. That is why it is imperative for Armenia to become a democracy, which is the only way to maintain its independence. After all, it is easier to control one tyrant than 3 million people.

  20. Anyone who does not acknowledge that what happened to the Armenians from 1915-1923 was Genocide automatically places themselves into the status of an IGNORAMUS and a FOOL, including every coward politician, writer, historian or anyone else. In fact the ignorance is not just ignorance, but it is ignorance with wicked gall.
    .
    When a word, Genocide, is created to describe the massacres of the Armenians, and a public official denies this simple concept by denying that the Armenian massacres were a ‘Genocide’, such a person is better known as an uneducated ignoramus, or a simpleton, and neither of these qualities is becoming of any public figure, and especially the president of the United States. And the excuse that the “US needs Turkey as a friend” is the excuse of either a clueless, amateur politician, or an enemy foreign agent who has infiltrated US politics and is working for foreign governments rather than the values of the US. Without the US (aka NATO), Turkey would not survive for one second. Turkey is in no position to be dictating US foreign policy, and especially US domestic policy.

    • ” Without the US (aka NATO), Turkey would not survive for one second”

      Speaking of ignoramuses….

    • And that’s the truth, RVDV. I stand ready to provide factual evidence of this throughout WWII, the post-WWII period, the Cold War, and the post-Soviet period. It will tone down your sarcasm, I hope.

    • Look who’s talking, “the genocide recognizing Kurd” who believes Turkey must keep all its ill-gotten lands of the Armenians, and calling others ignorant, while the US has one of its biggest bases in the great, independent, technology-leading super-power Turkiye. Good luck with your theory, “genius”.

    • History Professor Hagop: Please tell us which state controlled modern day eastern Turkey in 1915? If the answer is Armenia then you have a very serious case. If the answer is the predecessor state to Turkey, the Ottoman Empire, how can that land have been stolen during the genocide. If you believe it was stolen, look to the 16th and 15th centuries, you have a stronger case in that era… And here’s a thought. Maybe the reason the US has such a huge airbase in Incirlik is because of (spoiler alert) its proximity to the former USSR and the Middle east, which would explain why it’s still in use today. Turkey relies and depends on the US and NATO for various military and non-military reasons. That does not make Turkey a satellite state that will fall the instant the US and NATO leave, just like most communist eastern European states fell after the USSR.
      .
      John: I’ll hear you out, if you’d like to share your evidence.

    • Hagop D, I hope you don’t mind my interference into your debate with RVDV, but I just can’t stand when comments are not supported with factual evidence or are flawed by distorted evidence.

      RVDV, of course, formally the Ottoman Empire controlled modern-day eastern Turkey in 1915. But these lands, as well as the lands in Northern Africa, Middle East, and the Balkans that the Ottoman Empire also controlled before 1915 were, essentially, stolen lands. The title ‘Ottoman Empire’, in its last part, ‘empire’, must give you a lead. Do empires not acquire lands by force or coercion from native inhabitants? If this is not stealing, then what is it? In the Armenian case, it was double-stealing, because according to the Treaty of Sèvres that the Ottoman government had signed, most of the ancestral Armenian lands that were slotted in the Ottoman Empire in the 16th century were to form a new Republic of Armenia. Yes, the government of your predecessor state has agreed to assign most of the lands of modern-day eastern Turkey to the newly-formed Armenian state. Then the same predecessor state, in sheer violation of its own obligations under the Treaty of Sèvres to which it was a signatory, defied the treaty, and started the war which led to the Treaty of Lausanne effectively putting an end to the efforts of the international community to assign some of the historically Armenian lands to their rightful owners. If this is not stealing, then what is it?

      That Turkey is a satellite state, always was, and an extremely vulnerable one, I’ll prove in my next comment. Stand by.

    • John: “If this is not stealing, then what is it?”
      .
      From the point of view of the victim state/nation, yes this is stealing. From the point of view of the aggressor state this is little more than “to the victor goes the spoils.”
      .
      “Then the same predecessor state, in sheer violation of its own obligations under the Treaty of Sèvres to which it was a signatory, defied the treaty….. If this is not stealing, then what is it?”
      .
      Yes, it defied the treaty and went to war. War, the traditional means through which nations acquire and re-acquire land/territory. If that’s stealing, then if you live in the Southwest US or California you’re living on stolen Mexican land, because the US stole it in the Mexican-American war. Would you agree with that? And would you agree that essentially all of the United States is stolen land? If you agree with that, I will agree with you point because it will be clear to me that you are consistent and not biased with your interpretation of theft during wartime.
      .
      Regarding the satellite state, I’ll wait for your post, but I would generally not regard a state with the second largest army in NATO, a state which has some really nice ‘toys’ to play with (thanks to NATO), as ‘extremely’ vulnerable.

    • avatar Hagop D // May 1, 2013 at 1:05 pm //

      John, actually thank you for your input, you made some good points, and I will add some more within the context of the 20th century in response to RVDV’s response.
      .
      First some back ground. Right after WWII, Turkey was in its most vulnerable point. There was no NATO. Having recently committed the Armenian Genocide, it had a furious Armenia with fresh memories, and in addition had several hundred thousand battle-hardened Armenian soldiers returning from the front lines of WWII, ready to retake western Armenian territories, might I add with the full support and approval of Soviet Russia. Little Armenia by itself could have overrun all Turkey very quickly. So how did this come to change? Through the “decision of Turks”? Hardly.
      .
      When it became quite obvious the Soviet Union was about to overrun Turkey, Turkey’s ‘Title Holders’ the US/UK, threatened them promptly with a new war, if that should happen. The Soviets then backed down, they had realized how they got outsmarted by Turkey in previous “negotiations” where the Soviet Union would arm Turkey to invade Armenia and take the west, and in return Turkey will look the other way with the takeover of Azerbaijan and eastern Armenia. This time around, the Soviets were eying not only western Armenia, but all the way to Istanbul, a long-time plan of Russia in controlling the ports and thus becoming the boss of the black sea.
      .
      After the war, Churchill “disapproved” of the Soviets retaking even the territories around Kars. Have you noticed something already? “The great nation of Turkiye” is completely absent from the decision-making here – precisely because it was irrelevant what Turkey wanted or thought. Turkey was NEVER in any position to defend itself, it neither had the army, nor training, nor weapons. Actually it did have weapons – left from WWI. Thereafter, Turkey fell completely into the sphere of the US/UK where its existence and survival was concerned. No doubt Turkey was next too eager to send a token army (trained and armed by none other than NATO itself) into Korea to show NATO “how important it is” to be included in the club.
      .
      Now with these facts in mind, I ask you RVDV, with what audacity do you or any other Turk think that you are in any position to tell your current title holder, the USA and allies, what to do? And not only that, even threaten them with “consequences”, for example with the Armenian Genocide decisions.
      .
      The point is not that Armenia did not exist in 1915 “and therefore could not have its lands stolen”. The point is that with the dying Ottoman Empire, all nations self-determined to become nations again. Turkey never existed in history. And next the way it came to exist the way it is today was through acts of criminal premeditation and genocide. That’s where the problem is. Western Armenia was always called the Armenian Vilayets, and Turkey, through GENOCIDE, denied the indigenous Armenian population there their right to self-determination in forming a nation by killing them off and/or deporting them. That was too obvious. Kill everybody off, then declare a Republic.
      .
      Well guess what, Armenia came to exist as a tiny portion of its true self, and the surviving victims of Turkey’s Genocide are today living all over the world in exile, and Turkey has not been brought to justice as a result of many factors. But the Armenian Dispora has also self-determined today that we demand our country, and we will never give up our rights to our western territories, and Turkey will never rest assured that the Armenian Vilayets are “part of Turkey”.
      .
      As for your theory that Turkey does not need NATO to survive, we can find that out when the day comes that Turkey is no longer a part of NATO. Greeks have not forgotten their lost territories. Syria has territorial claims on Turkey, and Armenia and its diaspora definitely have the same. Even the Kurds of Iraq. With the exception of Georgia, I would say every immediate neighbor of Turkey has been violated to some degree and is not on good terms. With its large army Turkey may last for a while, but without all the support and aid, I doubt Turkey would be in any shape to defend itself from all the hostility it has created in the region.

    • “to the victor goes the spoils.” Is this the acumen of your mentality and judgment capacity, RVDV? So simplistic and unsophisticated? If it is, then I think it’s not worth continuing the debate, because with such a mentality one can stuff in the notion of “victor” any criminal. A murderer can be a victor because he took someone’s life. A thief can be a victor because he enriched himself with other people’s properties. An intruder can be a victor because he invaded the lands belonging to other people. A colonizer can be a victor because oppressed the freedom of a native people. A genocide perpetrator can be a victor because he deliberately annihilated a whole ethnic group of people. A genocide denier can be a victor because denialism helps him preserve the wealth he acquired by means of genocide. Is this what you’re trying to tell me? Unbelievable.

      “Yes, it [Turkey] defied the treaty and went to war.” Again, so simplistic and unsophisticated? Even the fact that the Ottomans signed an international treaty and then infringed it failed to deserve your disapproval?

      “War, the traditional means through which nations acquire and re-acquire land/territory”. I guess the question is: whose land/territory? If nations acquire and re-acquire their ancestral land/territory, as Armenians did in Artsakh, I’d agree with you. But when you know full well that in the 11th century the Turks have invaded and in the 16th century have colonized the land/territory that belonged to other people, then whose land/territory in 1920 were the Turks acquiring or re-acquiring?

      I’d agree that during colonial expansion the US acquired lands from Mexicans. However, the US didn’t wreck the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. The US has paid $15 million for the territories it has acquired. The US also assumed $3.25 million of debt owed by the Mexican government to the US. Most notably, the US hasn’t perpetrated the deliberate, state-sponsored wholesale mass extermination of the Mexican nation and their forced expulsion from their ancestral lands.

    • so, rvdv, “might makes right” is the turkish motto? meaning, with the same token, turks shouldn’t have complained about mavi marmara accident, but they have, and intensively so. does your nation have any sanity and convictions? or whatever is bad for others but good for turks is the primordial mentality that governs it?

    • “Is this the acumen of your mentality and judgment capacity, RVDV?”
      No. But it is the mentality of an aggressor state. For the rest of your questions regarding victors…. Yes. They can be considered victors, in THEIR eyes, and their eyes only. Not the eyes of the rest of us.
      .
      “Even the fact that the Ottomans signed an international treaty and then infringed it failed to deserve your disapproval?”
      Keeping your word is usually the right thing to do. But they didn’t, and as a result of not honoring a treaty, Turkey went to war gained a sizable amount of territory. How many signed treaties have subsequently been violated resulting in war and then newer treaties being signed, and then the cycle repeating? Countless? Yes, countless. So where do I even start with “disapproval?
      .
      “I’d agree that during colonial expansion the US acquired lands from Mexicans. However, the US didn’t wreck the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. The US has paid $15 million for the territories it has acquired. The US also assumed $3.25 million of debt owed by the Mexican government to the US.”
      .
      So if there was no treaty and Turkey gave Armenia money for eastern Turkey you’d be fine? Is the fact that a treaty was broken THAT critical to this debate? And leave genocide out of this. The bulk of the genocide was over by 1918 and the Treaty of Sevres.

    • avatar Hagop D // May 3, 2013 at 11:57 am //

      John, actually thanks for your input, I’ll also add another perspective. My last post went unpublished so will repost the second part again, the first part was history of Turkey with NATO, and how NATO/USA/UK saved Turkey from the Soviet Union, and today when Turkey acts like it can tell the EU and USA what to do it is quite laughable.
      .
      Regarding stolen lands. Besides the fact that Turkey also did not exist in 1915, the point is not that Armenia did not exist in 1915 “and therefore could not have its lands stolen”. The point is that with the dying Ottoman Empire, all nations self-determined to become nations again. Turkey never existed in history. In 1915, Armenia also did not legally exist, but what constituted Armenian lands was quite clear. And next the way “Turkey” came to exist the way it is today was through acts of criminal premeditation and genocide. That’s where the problem is. Western Armenia was always called the Armenian Vilayets, and Turkey, through GENOCIDE, denied the indigenous Armenian population there their right to self-determination in forming a nation like everyone else in the Ottoman Empire by killing them off and/or deporting them. That was too obvious. Kill everybody off, then declare a Turkish Republic on Armenia’s lands.
      .
      Well guess what, Armenia came to exist as a tiny portion of its true self, and the surviving victims of Turkey’s Genocide are today living all over the world in exile, and Turkey has not been brought to justice as a result of many factors. But the Armenian Dispora has also self-determined today that we demand our country, and we will never give up our rights to our western territories, and Turkey will never rest assured that the Armenian Vilayets are “part of Turkey”.
      .
      As for your theory that Turkey does not need NATO to survive, we can find that out when the day comes that Turkey is no longer a part of NATO. Greeks have not forgotten their lost territories. Syria has territorial claims on Turkey, and Armenia and its diaspora definitely have the same. Even the Kurds of Iraq. With the exception of Georgia, I would say every immediate neighbor of Turkey has been violated to some degree and is not on good terms. With its large army Turkey may last for a while, but without all the support and aid, I doubt Turkey would be in any shape to defend itself from all the hostility it has created in the region.

    • RVDV, the mentality of an aggressor state shouldn’t be allowed to take prevalence over our own mentality. For the criminals or criminal states not to consider themselves victors a whole set of rules generally accepted as binding in relations between states and nations has been created: the international law.

      As for disapproval of Turkey’s dishonoring the Sèvres treaty, start from yourself, I mean, from Turkey itself. Doing so will lead you to a conclusion as to what kind of a nation the Turks are, if their greed sand fanaticism take them as a far as to break an international treaty and gain an amount of territory that never originally belonged to them.

      [So if there was no treaty and Turkey gave Armenia money for eastern Turkey you’d be fine?]
      A very hypothetical question, to say the least. Knowing the Turks, I highly doubt that they’re at all capable of giving something back to rightful owners. The bulk of their history is invasion, expansion, colonization, oppression, massacres, theft, genocide, and denialism. How can such a nation give money for the territories that they knew belonged to other people?! Even if the money was offered—a science fiction in the case of thieving Turks—I think anything that’d save lives of millions of innocent people could have been more acceptable, hypothetically speaking, than the option of their savage mass slaughter.

      [Is the fact that a treaty was broken THAT critical to this debate?]
      Maybe not for this particular debate, but for the Armenian Cause it is very critical, because Turkey has violated an international treaty that’d restore some of the ancient Armenian lands to the Armenian nation.

      [And leave genocide out of this. The bulk of the genocide was over by 1918 and the Treaty of Sevres.]
      Actually genocide has a direct relation to the Treaty of Sèvres, because the Wilsonian Armenia was drawn so to protect the new Armenian state from further Turkish threats bearing in mind the genocide (e.g. assigning Trabizon to Armenia that’d provide the new state with a naval outlet).

  21. I want the President of the United States to use the term genocide when discussing the crime that was committed against the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire from 1915-1923. But given the current political agenda of the US, the power elites and the military, we should not be surprised that Turkey garners so much influence. Disappointed, yes. Ashamed, yes. But surprised, no. It’s time we place more emphasis on gaining recognition from other countries of the world, methodically and systematically increasing pressure on Turkey. We need to be more strategic and targeted with our limited resources.

  22. avatar Sylva-MD-Poetry // April 25, 2013 at 5:26 pm // Reply

    We are proud of ourselves …
    We did our duty and elected him…
    He should be shy of himself
    He did not respect his promise…!
    Sylva-MD-Poetry

  23. Vahagn, you mean to tell us that well-dressed, bloodthirsty reptiles in Washington are ultimately taking the side of Turks because Turks are “democratic”? You mean to tell us that the political West does not side with Armenia because Armenia is not “democratic”?

    Is that the reason why the US supports some of the most tyrannical regimes in the world, including Azerbaijan and Saudi Arabia?

    And just how successful has “democracy” been in Serbia, Egypt, Libya or Syria?

    Are you sure you are not a DOD financed cyber-warrior as some are suggesting here?

    Your nonsensical cliches about “democracy” and your virulent attacks against the Armenian state are getting sillier and sillier. I don’t know who you are, but I’m very happy you are here for you are an excellent excuse against any form of “democracy” in Armenia.

    • Harutik, I didn’t suggest any of these things. What I pointed out was that in the absence of democracy, when Serzh does not draw his legitimacy from the people, he necessarily has to bow to the will of the great powers, thus selling out the interests of Armenia. Thinking that I meant something else means you may have issues with comprehension.
      .
      If democracy did not work in the countries that you mentioned, it did not work because it was done the wrong way. Logically, we should follow examples of successful democracies, such as the U.S., not the failed ones. Somehow, the enemies of democracy tend to point to the failed forms of democracies, which just shows that you are desperate.
      .
      When you accuse the pro-democracy forces in Armenia of being Washington’s operatives with no proof, it actually makes you look quite silly. Are you sure you are not Kermlin’s hired operative trying to prevent Armenia from becoming stronger and prosperous? Are you sure you are not ethnic Turk or Azeri, since being against a democratic Armenia means being against a strong Armenia?

    • Actually, not only President Serj Sargsyan draws his 58% legitimacy approval from a comfortable majority of the Armenian electorate, and by extension the Armenian people, but his closest opponent, Raffi Hovannisian lacks any legitimacy or popular support. Witness the puny 8,000 person showing of his putative followers on April 9th. Witness the fact that a couple of thousand his supposed followers defied his wishes and decided to attack the police lines and storm the official residence of the President of RoA. Witness the dwindling numbers of his ‘followers’ at public events: there were, what, 500 people on Liberty Square on April 24th with him ? Even his former supposed allies ANC and ARF are backing away from him: nobody wants the malodor of a loser to stick to them.
      And it is quite amusing for someone who calls our heroic indigenous brothers and sisters of Artsakh, quote, ‘separatists’, and who falsely claims Serj Sargsyan and Robert Kocharyan are, quote, ‘Azerbaijani citizens’, to ask an Armenian poster: “…sure you are not ethic Turk or Azeri”. Talk about kettle, pot, black, AzeriTatarTurk invader, indigenous Artskahtsi Armenian, ‘separatists’, and all that.

    • [Are you sure you are not Kermlin’s hired operative trying to prevent Armenia from becoming stronger and prosperous?

      It saddens me to see posters reasoning with accusations of allegiance to Moscow or Washington. I call it “political provincialism”. Not only the Armenians, but I’d hazard a guess all smaller nations suffer from such mentality. I think no larger state is interested in making a smaller state stronger and prosperous. “Make thy neighbor week, dependent, and controllable” has been and will always be the guideline for stronger states in dealings with smaller states. Therefore, Vahagn, there is no evidence that’d suggest that if America takes over Armenia, Armenia will become stronger and prosperous. Neither is Russia interested in such Armenia. But there is one important factor for Armenia in the Kremlin-White House dilemma, i.e. geographically, historically, religiously, and culturally Russia is much closer to Armenia. Not to take this factor into account is to demonstrate political myopia.

    • Petros, there has been a misunderstanding. I never suggested that the U.S. take over Armenia. Suggesting that Armenia should be a democracy does not mean suggesting that it should ally itself with the U.S. Armenia can be democratic while being an ally of Russia. I agree that great powers are not interested in making Armenia stronger. What can make Armenia stronger is the Armenian people, and the Armenia people do not seem to want to live or invest in a non-democratic Armenia.
      .
      As I have stated before, I am against generalizing negative traits about our people. There are many individuals among “bigger” nations engaging in political provincialism. Without a scientific study, I do not presume to claim that it is more prevalent among Armenians. In this case, by using the “Kemlin operative” phrase, I was merely giving an earlier poster a taste of his own medicine.

  24. Forget the Us government. Instead educate every American and with out pause… That is the only solution as denial will seem absurd to most..The American involvement during and after the genocide is substantial and well archived. This should be put forth. Constantly..

  25. I am ashamed to be an American-Armenian and I’m ashamed of our government in America. What’s the point of voting when you know the big boys will do as they please? America has become a global empire and its politics reflects this. Empires live and die by one rule: might makes right. Those that say Armenia’s future is with Russia are right. Let’s hope however that Russia remains in “Russian” hands. The last thing we need in Russia is a foreign revolution like the one one hundred years ago.

    • Krikor, which part of “Armenian-American” are you ashamed of, the Armenian or the American? If it’s the second, why not move to a country that you will be proud of? I am surprised at some Armenians who dislike the community or the country they live in and still continue to live in it.
      .
      The Armenian-American community is a very vibrant and active community, and we Armenian-Americans should be proud of being Armenians and Armenian-Americans. Given that America’s interests lie more with Turkey than pro-Russian Armenia, the fact that the U.S. politicians and presidents state this much in favor of Armenia is a testament to the relentless work that the Armenian-Americans have done. We Armenians are a great people and should never be ashamed of being part of the nation or any of its communities. The problems we face are not because of some “inherent” problem with our people, but due to external factors or specific organizations/individuals among us.
      .
      As for Russia, Russia supports Armenia only because it is in Russia’s interests. Russia has betrayed Armenians even when it was ruled by ethnic Russians, such as during the Genocide and in the prior decades. Russia will discard Armenia like a handkerchief when it doesn’t need us any more. The key is to make Armenia stronger, which will not happen unless Armenia is democratic.

  26. While we in the Armenian diaspora are upset with President Obama for not properly referring to the events of 1915-23 as genocide, we can take some comfort in the fact that Ankara disliked Mr. Obama’s statement as much or more than we did.

    In Orhan Kemal Cengiz’ April 25th article in Today’s Zaman he includes the text of the Foreign Ministry response:
    diasporahttp://www.todayszaman.com/columnistDetail_getNewsById.action?newsId=313716

    “In his statement issued on April 24, 2013, US President Obama has unfortunately demonstrated this year, once again, a one-sided approach that reflects the Armenian views regarding the dispute between Turks and Armenians on the painful part of their common history. We regard this statement, which distorts the historical facts, as problematic in every aspect and deeply regret it.”

    This is the official response, demonstrating nothing new from Ankara, which clings to the myth of ‘mutual suffering’ to dilute our claim. However, Cengiz goes on to highlight the political and social changes occurring in Turkish society that are evident in the increasing number of commemorative events and in the number of attendees at these events. The language of the ‘call’ to the commemoration as quoted in Cengiz’ piece, couldn’t be clearer:

    “”This year’s text uses a more reckless wording. It opens up with the sentence “We commemorate genocide victims,” and further reads, “This operation of destruction that started on April 24, 1915, destroyed the Armenian people collectively.””

    The ‘official’ is clashing with the ‘truthful’ in Turkey. My heartfelt appreciation goes to the brave Armenians and Turks who are behind this trend.

    • I beg to disagree, Boyajian. Ankara plays a typically Turkish game: they show they disliked Obama’s statement more than Armenians did as a preventative measure against any possibility of Obama’s using the proper word in his next statements, especially the one on the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. But it is clear already that Obama most likely will not keep his promise. The more I live in the US the more I admire France and her learders — presidents who have balls.

    • john, if you admire France while living in the U.S., why not move to France? It must be hard to live in a country that you dislike.
      .
      It has been a while since I have seen the words “balls” and “France” in the same sentence. If only France had those balls when it betrayed Armenians in Marash and Cilician in 1920, or in Alexandrette in 1939. While I appreciate France’s relatively pro-Armenian stance, we need to recognize that, just as with the U.S. politicians, self interest plays a major role with the French politicians. The French public feels more threatened by muslims and Turkey than the U.S.; Turkey plays far less strategic role for France than for the U.S.; France, which is in much better relations with Russia and gets oil and gas from there does not need the Azeri oil as much as America does. And the French Armenians have greater influence in the politics than in the U.S., since they form a greater portion of France’s population, and France is much smaller in population.
      .
      While we talk about the leaders of this or that state, we need to realize that the biggest betrayer of the Armenian cause is the “president” of Armenia. The Armenian government is supposed to spearhead the recognition efforts throughout the world, not the ANCA or the other Diasporan organizations. Instead, Serzh backstabs the Diasporan efforts, disregarding the interests of his people. That is what you get in the absence of democracy.

    • Logically, yes, Vahagn, it is hard to live in a country whose government one dislikes for its shameful stance on the Armenian Genocide recognition, but it’s even harder to move anywhere else when one has family and financial obligations, as well as work commitment. Otherwise, language-, culture-, and values-wise, it shouldn’t have been a problem for me, originally a Lebanese Armenian, to live in France.

      The arguments you’ve presented to justify America’s position and belittle the position of France are highly controversial, some are outrightly inaccurate in terms of historical evidence, but I’d like to avoid polemics. In short, almost every great nation has betrayed the Armenians during the years of genocide and beyond. The issue is that some of those nations and their leaders had balls to recognize this (for instance, Germany, read Bundestag’s 2005 AG resolution), while others jig to the tune of Turkey.

      Your arguments serve no purpose, because French leaders did promise to recognize the AG and criminalize its denial, and they had kept their promise. At the same time, the U.S. leader made a promise to recognize the AG and had reneged on it. End of story.

    • One more thing, Vahagn. Your points about Armenia’s president being the biggest betrayer of the Armenian cause and about the Armenian government’s failing to spearhead the recognition efforts throughout the world, are somewhat irrelevant. Although I criticize the Armenian president’s involvement in controversial protocol business with the Turks and his support for ‘medz yeghern’ linguistic gymnastics performed by the president of a third country, the fact remains that the Republic of Armenia has officially recognized the Armenian Genocide back in 1991.

    • I appreciate your comments above, John, but what is it that we differ on?

      I expected that Obama would fall short as President on the Armenian issue. The current political petro-agenda of the US is to maintain influence in the Middle East,gain influence in the Caucasus, and contain Russia, all of which requires being cozy with Turks and their Caucasian cousins.

    • I believe it is on your statement to the effect that “we can take comfort in the fact that Ankara disliked Mr. Obama’s statement as much or more than we did” that we differ. I explained why Ankara shows her dislike. The current political petro-agenda of the US to maintain influence in the Middle East, gain influence in the Caucasus, and contain Russia, was there back in 2008 when Obama made his promise to recognize, as President, the Armenian Genocide. As a US Senator and a presidential candidate it is highly unlikely that he could have been unaware of this agenda, isn’t it? Yet, he’s made the promise. Therefore, I guess the question is: could it be only the US political agenda? Again, if it is a factor, then it’s been present back in 2008 at the time Obama made the promise.

    • sorry, i mistyped my name in a hurry. john

    • John, so you dislike the U.S. but live there for basically economic reasons. Do you not see the hypocrisy there? And probably by financial obligations you mean a job, a mortgage, opportunities that America has given you. People from Armenia and elsewhere leave their homes and jobs to come to the U.S. You could do the same if you like France so much. Perhaps you do not think you could find the same opportunities that the U.S. has offered you? Again, don’t you see the hypocrisy there? You said family obligations. Could it be that your family is not as willing as you to leave, because they are more appreciative of the country that provides them with these opportunities? And I do not want to pry into your life, but assuming you were born in the U.S. or came at a young age, you should ask why your family chose to come to the U.S., as opposed to another country, from Lebanon. Maybe because they appreciated what the U.S. offered to them and to you? And then perhaps you should ask yourself, maybe the reason the U.S. offers all these opportunities to people like you is because of its system that you so fundamentally dislike.
      .
      Regarding French politicians keeping their promise to criminalize the denial of the Genocide, that promise was kept for, what, a few days? The French Senate referred the bill to the Supreme Court, which struck it down, thus suggesting that the Armenian Genocide did not deserve the same treatment as the Holocaust. All thanks to (at least in part) to the Azeri lobby. So much for the balls of the French politicians.
      .
      As for Armenia, I would think we Armenians should expect more from Armenia than recognizing the Genocide. The Armenian people expect Armenia to lead the diplomatic efforts of recognition, not backstab them. The fact that Armenia recognized the Genocide in 1991 does not exonerate the backstabbing actions of Serzh in 2009 and 2012.

    • Vahagn, I said I disliked the US government—not the US—for its shameful stance on the AG recognition. This makes your ranting about hypocrisy null and void. Since you seem to be so interested in the reason why I came to America, be aware that “better opportunities” had nothing to do with it. The reason was routinely ordinary: I left during the Lebanese Civil War and came to the US because some of my relatives have already settled here.

      It is undeniable that France has recognized the AG, her Senate has voted for the bill that’d criminalize its denial, and her presidents—past or present—not only promise but act, too, to fulfill their pledge on the bill. Even if the Supreme Court struck it down (for now), the way France has traveled in the AG recognition is unmatched to the US lagging far behind. I’m sorry if you can’t see this reality.

      As for Armenia, I believe she will do more than recognizing the Genocide when several important regional, diasporan, legal, and international factors ripen.

    • John, you have consistently expressed the view that the U.S., a country that prides itself in its democratic values, is not democratic. Clearly, you not only dislike the U.S. government, but you have fundamental issues with its entire political system. So, is it that you like the U.S. values and culture, but like the French values and culture just abit more? Or you dislike the U.S. culture just like you dislike it’s system. Or, as a third option, you just don’t care about the U.S. and are merely using it? Are these any less hypocritical?
      .
      You may also want to ask yourself, why is it that your relatives had chosen to come to the U.S. out of all places? Maybe they appreciated the country, unlike you?
      .
      Yes, Armenia will take a leadership role in genocide recognition when a key factor ripens–Armenia becomes a democracy, with its president answering to its people’s wishes.

    • Vahagn, it seems you’re trying to prove something to yourself, not to me. A political system of a country is not the same as her form of government. Political system is a system of politics, whereas democracy is a form of government. I believe I proved to you in other threads, unless you play ostrich, that the US—whether it prides itself in its democratic values or not—is not a democracy. It is not the rule by the majority. I’d like to avoid reiterating the same evidence for someone like you, who seems to be obsessed with the American form of government as if America’s form of government cannot have blemishes just as any other form of government. And, no, none of my relatives was thinking about appreciating the American democratic values before immigrating to the US.

    • I posted this at the wrong thread. It’s ok, I will repost.

      The issue in this discussion, john, is not really whether the U.S. is a democracy or not, but the apparent contradiction in the fact that you and other’s like you chose to come to the U.S. and still dislike it, either its government or the country. If you do not want to share your feelings about the country, that is your right, but I have observed this phenomenon with some Armenians, who take advantage of the benefits and opportunities offered by the U.S. and yet dislike it. There is something disconcerting and hypocritical in such an attitude. And I do not know why your relatives chose the U.S. out of all the countries on the world, but chances are that what drew them here (stability, security, opportunities) are all results of America’s democratic system.
      .
      I do not say that the American democracy has no blemishes, but I don’t find it logical to say that it does not exist, despite your failed attempts to prove otherwise. And I think despite political differences, the U.S. deserves some appreciation from Armenians for the enormous assistance that it provided to us after the Genocide, and after the 1988 earthquake. In the words of pro-Armenian british historian Christopher Walker:
      “But perhaps the greatest sympathy for the Armenian people came from the United States. … The Americans in Armenia are remembered above all for their generosity in sending relief. Individuals and organisations poured thousands of dollars into funds for the starving Armenians. ”
      http://armenia-survival.50megs.com/Survival_Ch_8.htm

  27. avatar Sylva-MD-Poetry // April 28, 2013 at 10:15 am // Reply

    We are asking Justice…only Justice …
    If you as a President, Doctor, Lawyer and your were poet as well…
    Still you have fear to provide justice…for our genocided populace…?
    Who will be able to provide then…
    How can you hug someone who is grandson of a betrayer
    And breathe his breath…Face to face…
    Feel his friend… on the account our lost lives …
    Can you call your self “Doctor-Lawyer”…???
    Qualified from one of the best Institution, Harvard…
    Don’t see your self in 2 mirrors
    If you want us to call you the new Lincoln…of the 21th century…
    Say it was the First Genocide…!!!
    And let them give us back our lands…
    As president Woodrow Wilson Pointed on the map in 1919
    HERE is ARMENIA…
    Sylva-MD-Poetry

  28. But perhaps the greatest sympathy for the Armenian people came from the United States. … The Americans in Armenia are remembered above all for their generosity in sending relief. Individuals and organisations poured thousands of dollars into funds for the starving Armenians- Great. we are very appreciative of that and i can never utem uranam… they did help..

    BUT
    at the same time.. the same country who helped and was very well aware of what was going on with the Armenians are denying and refusing to recognize the Genocide happened and stand firm with the Armenians… hypocracy in full force?

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*