Row over US Ambassador's Armenian Genocide remark

[Tongue]

By Rupert Cornwell in Washington
Published: 23 March 2006


Protests are growing over the possible recall of the US ambassador in Armenia after he described the 1915 massacres of Armenians by the Ottoman Turks as genocide. If he is recalled, it would be seen as giving in to Turkish pressure.

Officially, John Marshall Evans remains - for the time being at least - Washington's man in Erevan. "Ambassador Evans is our ambassador, and he continues ... to exercise that honour and privilege," a State Department official said last week.

But that assurance has satisfied neither the ethnic Armenian community in the US, nor members of Congress from southern California where the community is centred. Their suspicion is that a successor for Mr Evans has already been lined up, and he will be ordered home. Adam Schiff and Grace Napolitano, representing districts in the Los Angeles area, have taken up the matter with the State Department. "I expressed my opposition to any disciplinary action being taken against the ambassador for speaking the truth," Mr Schiff said.

Mr Evans caused a diplomatic sensation in February 2005 when he flatly called the massacres a genocide, during an appearance at the University of California at Berkeley. It was "unbecoming of us as Americans to play word games here," he declared. "I will today call it the Armenian genocide."

By doing so, he became the first US official to use the loaded word in an Armenian context. Like the Clinton administration before it, the Bush administration has always referred to the slaughter as a massacre or a tragedy, but not as a genocide. The circumspection is widely seen as an effort not to upset Turkey, an important US ally in the Middle East that shares borders with Iraq and Iran.

The stand-off follows successive efforts by Mr Schiff to introduce a bill specifically recognising the events of 1915 as an act of genocide - efforts that have been blocked at the White House's behest.

Protests are growing over the possible recall of the US ambassador in Armenia after he described the 1915 massacres of Armenians by the Ottoman Turks as genocide. If he is recalled, it would be seen as giving in to Turkish pressure.

Officially, John Marshall Evans remains - for the time being at least - Washington's man in Erevan. "Ambassador Evans is our ambassador, and he continues ... to exercise that honour and privilege," a State Department official said last week.

But that assurance has satisfied neither the ethnic Armenian community in the US, nor members of Congress from southern California where the community is centred. Their suspicion is that a successor for Mr Evans has already been lined up, and he will be ordered home. Adam Schiff and Grace Napolitano, representing districts in the Los Angeles area, have taken up the matter with the State Department. "I expressed my opposition to any disciplinary action being taken against the ambassador for speaking the truth," Mr Schiff said.
Mr Evans caused a diplomatic sensation in February 2005 when he flatly called the massacres a genocide, during an appearance at the University of California at Berkeley. It was "unbecoming of us as Americans to play word games here," he declared. "I will today call it the Armenian genocide."

By doing so, he became the first US official to use the loaded word in an Armenian context. Like the Clinton administration before it, the Bush administration has always referred to the slaughter as a massacre or a tragedy, but not as a genocide. The circumspection is widely seen as an effort not to upset Turkey, an important US ally in the Middle East that shares borders with Iraq and Iran.

The stand-off follows successive efforts by Mr Schiff to introduce a bill specifically recognising the events of 1915 as an act of genocide - efforts that have been blocked at the White House's behest.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article352977.ece

[Joseph]

By Rupert Cornwell in Washington
Published: 23 March 2006


Protests are growing over the possible recall of the US ambassador in Armenia after he described the 1915 massacres of Armenians by the Ottoman Turks as genocide. If he is recalled, it would be seen as giving in to Turkish pressure.

Officially, John Marshall Evans remains - for the time being at least - Washington's man in Erevan. "Ambassador Evans is our ambassador, and he continues ... to exercise that honour and privilege," a State Department official said last week.

But that assurance has satisfied neither the ethnic Armenian community in the US, nor members of Congress from southern California where the community is centred. Their suspicion is that a successor for Mr Evans has already been lined up, and he will be ordered home. Adam Schiff and Grace Napolitano, representing districts in the Los Angeles area, have taken up the matter with the State Department. "I expressed my opposition to any disciplinary action being taken against the ambassador for speaking the truth," Mr Schiff said.

Mr Evans caused a diplomatic sensation in February 2005 when he flatly called the massacres a genocide, during an appearance at the University of California at Berkeley. It was "unbecoming of us as Americans to play word games here," he declared. "I will today call it the Armenian genocide."

By doing so, he became the first US official to use the loaded word in an Armenian context. Like the Clinton administration before it, the Bush administration has always referred to the slaughter as a massacre or a tragedy, but not as a genocide. The circumspection is widely seen as an effort not to upset Turkey, an important US ally in the Middle East that shares borders with Iraq and Iran.

The stand-off follows successive efforts by Mr Schiff to introduce a bill specifically recognising the events of 1915 as an act of genocide - efforts that have been blocked at the White House's behest.

Protests are growing over the possible recall of the US ambassador in Armenia after he described the 1915 massacres of Armenians by the Ottoman Turks as genocide. If he is recalled, it would be seen as giving in to Turkish pressure.

Officially, John Marshall Evans remains - for the time being at least - Washington's man in Erevan. "Ambassador Evans is our ambassador, and he continues ... to exercise that honour and privilege," a State Department official said last week.

But that assurance has satisfied neither the ethnic Armenian community in the US, nor members of Congress from southern California where the community is centred. Their suspicion is that a successor for Mr Evans has already been lined up, and he will be ordered home. Adam Schiff and Grace Napolitano, representing districts in the Los Angeles area, have taken up the matter with the State Department. "I expressed my opposition to any disciplinary action being taken against the ambassador for speaking the truth," Mr Schiff said.
Mr Evans caused a diplomatic sensation in February 2005 when he flatly called the massacres a genocide, during an appearance at the University of California at Berkeley. It was "unbecoming of us as Americans to play word games here," he declared. "I will today call it the Armenian genocide."

By doing so, he became the first US official to use the loaded word in an Armenian context. Like the Clinton administration before it, the Bush administration has always referred to the slaughter as a massacre or a tragedy, but not as a genocide. The circumspection is widely seen as an effort not to upset Turkey, an important US ally in the Middle East that shares borders with Iraq and Iran.

The stand-off follows successive efforts by Mr Schiff to introduce a bill specifically recognising the events of 1915 as an act of genocide - efforts that have been blocked at the White House's behest.

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...icle352977.ece

I hope Evans remains at his post. It's very unusual to see an ambassador with balls. It look like he may indeed finish hi term because enough of a rucus has been made. If nobody did anything to support him, he'd be gone.

[Gondorian]

The US Constitution expressly protects Freedom Of Speech.

[Tongue]

Genocide comment could cost ambassador to Armenia his job

By MICHAEL DOYLE
McClatchy Newspapers
28-MAR-06

WASHINGTON -- Ambassador John Evans is unfailingly diplomatic about his fate as the plain-speaking U.S. envoy to Armenia.

Others, including California lawmakers and Armenian-American activists, are more blunt.

Unhappy lawmakers and activists contend Evans is being forced from his post because he conceded last year that the term "Armenian genocide" appropriately described the slaughter of Armenians between 1915 and 1923. His potential career problem is that the State Department and the government of Turkey do not accept the term.

On Tuesday, sounding as if he were reciting carefully prepared talking points, Evans spoke delicately about his current status.

"I am still the ambassador," Evans said in a brief interview during a Washington visit. "I have not submitted my retirement papers."

At the same time, the career foreign service officer underscored the temporary nature of any diplomatic posting. In June, he will have served in Armenia for two years _ and he also will have reached the 35-year mark in the State Department.

"No ambassador stays forever," Evans said, twice.

A Yale graduate who speaks four foreign languages, and is currently studying Eastern Armenian, Evans is now the subject of considerable speculation by politically active Armenian Americans and their congressional champions. Ever since rumors began running rampant several weeks ago that Evans was to be recalled or otherwise disciplined, interest groups and lawmakers with large Armenian-American constituencies have been weighing in.

Most recently, Rep. George Radanovich, R-Calif., has called the State Department to request a meeting. It has not yet been scheduled.

Other lawmakers, too, have been increasing the pressure. At least three members of Congress, including California Democratic Reps. Adam Schiff and Grace Napolitano, have leveled written blasts at the State Department.

"I do not believe it is possible for any ambassador to Armenia to function with any credibility if he does not recognize the genocide," Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., wrote Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on March 10. "It is simply wrong for the State Department to punish Ambassador Evans for statements he made that are factually correct."

Schiff, a member of the House International Relations Committee, followed up with written questions presented to Rice. Schiff, who in the past has co-sponsored Armenian genocide resolutions with Radanovich, also met privately with State Department officials. So far, though, the State Department has not responded save for a routine official statement.

"U.S. ambassadors serve at the pleasure of the president," the State Department declared. "Ambassador Evans and his capable team have the full confidence of the administration."

The State Department, under both Democratic and Republican presidents, has consistently opposed congressional measures that commemorate or even use the term "Armenian genocide." The State Department contends historians disagree over whether the legal term "genocide" applies; more fundamentally, officials worry about antagonizing Turkey, a strategically located NATO ally.

Evans, who helped coordinate the U.S. response to the devastating 1988 Armenian earthquake, later began studying Ottoman history before going on to other diplomatic assignments.

"I informed myself in depth about it," Evans told an Armenian-American audience in Berkeley, Calif., according to an account provided by Pallone's office. "I think we, the U.S. government, owe you, our fellow citizens, a more frank and honest way of discussing this problem. I think it is unbecoming of us, as Americans, to play word games here. I believe in calling things by their name."

Armenian officials agree. About Evans, though, they, too, are circumspect.

"The U.S. ambassador is the U.S. ambassador," Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian said in response to a question Tuesday. "Until he leaves the country, we will treat him as such."

http://www.shns.com/shns/g_index2.cfm?action=detail&pk=ARMENIA-03-28-06

[Gavur]

'We Will Remember not the Words of our Enemies, but the Silence of our Friends'

'We Will Remember not the Words of our
Enemies, but the Silence of our Friends'
By Harut Sassounian
Publisher, The California Courier
As Armenians are commemorating the anniversary of the Armenian Genocide
this week, they should keep in mind that 91 years after the fact, a
distinguished U.S. diplomat has become its latest victim!
John Evans, the U.S. Ambassador to Armenia, fortunately has not lost his
life, but has sacrificed his diplomatic career for speaking out on the
Armenian Genocide. He is being recalled by the State Department for
publicly acknowledging the facts of the Genocide during his tour of the
United States last year.
As Martin Luther King said: "At the end, we will remember not the words of
our enemies, but the silence of our friends." This famous statement aptly
describes the regrettable situation Amb. Evans and Armenians find
themselves in. The U.S. Ambassador is a true friend of Armenia and
Armenians. But, more importantly, he is a defender of the truth. His
friends should not remain silent about his predicament.
By speaking out, Armenians would be defending not so much the Ambassador --
who deserves their full support -- but their own cause. They cannot remain
silent when the State Department is indirectly trying to bury the truth
about the Armenian Genocide. A noble messenger is being eliminated in order
to silence his message!
The upcoming commemorative events of the Armenian Genocide are the perfect
opportunity for Armenians to raise their voices in defense of the
acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide, in solidarity with Amb. Evans. As
Armenians gather in various cities throughout the world during the week of
April 24, the keynote speakers at commemorative events in every city should
condemn the shameful action of the State Department against one of its
finest diplomats! They should urge their audiences to write to the State
Department expressing their outrage about its inexcusable treatment of Amb.
Evans.
A group of Armenian Americans and their friends in Yerevan are launching
this week a "Yellow Ribbon" campaign in order to shatter the wall of
silence surrounding this affair. As more than a million Armenians will be
marching in a solemn procession to the Genocide Memorial Monument in
Yerevan on April 24, volunteers will be asking each individual to tie a
yellow ribbon on a rope along the path leading toward the Monument. The
organizers have chosen the "Yellow Ribbon" campaign as a mode of silent and
respectful protest that is so familiar to Americans. This activity will be
publicized throughout Armenia as well as the Diaspora.
These actions and the ensuing publicity would add to the extensive media
coverage in recent weeks of the State Department's shocking recall of Amb.
Evans. As the Los Angeles Times wrote in an editorial published on March
22: "Punishing an ambassador for speaking honestly about a 90-year-old
crime befits a cynical, double-dealing monarchy, not the leader of the free
world." In a similar harshly worded editorial published on March 24, the
Fresno Bee wrote: "Shame on the State Department" for recalling Amb. Evans.
Prominent British journalist Robert Fisk wrote a scathing article in The
Independent on April 8. He castigated the State Department for recalling
Amb. Evans and took Pres. Bush to task for reneging on his campaign promise
of acknowledging the Armenian Genocide. Fisk said that after getting
elected, Pres. Bush "caved in, gutlessly calling it [the Armenian Genocide]
a 'tragedy' so that he wouldn't get his fingers burned by that wonderful
democratic NATO ally - and would-be EU member - called Turkey."
Despite extensive critical media attention and several letters of inquiry
by members of Congress to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the State
Department continues to stonewall and remain officially silent on the Evans
affair.
If Armenians worldwide react strongly on this occasion, maybe in the
future the State Department and the White House would carefully weigh the
repercussions of their actions, before contemplating important decisions on
Armenian issues. Silence and inaction are not valuable commodities in the
pursuit of any cause, let alone a noble one!