WASHINGTON - President Bush and the Dalai Lama will meet today with a ceremony planned for tomorrow to award the spiritual leader the Congressional Gold Medal. China is warning that the events are bad for U.S.-Chinese ties....

The whole article here

China always says that. They've just been saying it about Germany, where Angela Merkel met the Dalai Lama. She didn't give the man a medal but that can hardly make much difference. China always decides that these meetings are political, not personal or spiritual, and we always claim that they are personal or spiritual (depending whether 'we' are godless, like Britain, or secular, like the US )

I agree, Fred.

The Australian PM met with the Dalai Lama recently, and the Canadians gave him an honory citizenship, with no serious repercussions from China.

China's way is to protest and talk a lot on this issue. In my opinion, she is unlikely to do much more, because she has the 2008 Olympics to think about.

I believe the Bush government is using the Dalai Lama as a photo op to present a kinder, more compassionate face to it's administration, and at the same time show the world it can stand up to China ..well sort of. ( protocol has been carefully set for this meeting, with a mind to not upsetting China too much).

The Dalai Lama, is a humble, but shrewd man, and knows that such a meeting is seen as being about Tibet, and his position as both the spiritiual leader and exiled head of government, regardless of how the US promotes it.
It's a win-win situation for both parties.

On a side note, I was lucky enough to go and listen to a talk given by the Dalai Lama, a few years ago, when he was in Canada. He is an interesting and charismatic man. It was a humbling experience for me.

It's interesting that bush personally receives the DL over the protest of China (who owns most of our debt), while condemning the proposal in Congress to denote the genocide in Turkey 100 years ago as genocide in Turkey 100 years ago. As usual, the terms "hypocrite, expedient, opportunistic, and two-faced" have no meaning to politicians, on whatever side of the aisle they find themselves...

sid, what's puzzling about the Armenian genocide is not that Bush would rather not have the topic raised at this time but that anyone sees some need to raise it now. What possible reason could there be in the United States, some ninety years after the event, to raise this generally forgotten piece of history ? Cynically I assume that there is an 'Armenian vote' in the United States.Why else would American politicians express interest? We here (i.e.Britain) accept that there was such a genocide but it's not a matter which gets raised in Parliament much !Turkey has been trying, and failing, to join the European Union. Objections to her entry are based, inter alia,on her present human rights record, not what her people did at the time of the Great War.

Surely the survivors (Yes, there still are some; I have met a few.) and their relatives (This group includes every Armenian I know, and I know scores, if not hundreds.) deserve to have what was without a doubt genocide acknowledged as such. Turkey refuses. That is their right. The US House of Representatives can certainly vote to declare what happened genocide (thus joining quite a few countries in recognizing it). That is their right, too.

Washington, DC -- In a powerfully worded letter to two of his leading Armenian American supporters, Republican presidential hopeful Texas Governor George Bush acknowledged the Armenian Genocide, called on Americans to join with him in remembering the crime committed against the Armenian people, and pledged as President to ensure that the United States properly recognizes this terrible atrocity, reported the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA).

Governor Bush's letter, addressed to Michigan community activist Edgar Hagopian and New York businessman Vasken Setrakian, who attended Harvard with the Governor, also called for continued U.S. aid to Armenia, encouraged a peaceful settlement of the Nagorno Karabagh conflict, and praised the "tremendous contribution of the Armenian community to the United States."

"We welcome Governor Bush's principled stand on the Armenian Genocide and join with him in calling upon all Americans to acknowledge both the facts and lessons of this crime against humanity," said ANCA Executive Director Aram Hamparian. "We would like, as well, to voice our community's gratitude to Vasken Setrakian and Edgar Hagopian, both of whom have done so much to share with Governor Bush the issues of pressing concern to our community. We appreciate their leadership and value their contribution to expanding the voice of Armenian Americans in the political process." - http://www.anca.org/press_releases/press_releases.php?prid=3

From the same source -



Armenian National Committee of America
888 17th Street, NW, Suite 904, Washington, DC 20006
Tel. (202) 775-1918 * Fax. (202) 775-5648 * Email.anca@anca.org

PRESS RELEASE

For Immediate Release ~ 2000-02-20
Contact: Elizabeth Chouldjian ~ Tel: (202) 775-1918

GEORGE W. BUSH RECOGNIZES ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

Republican Candidate Calls on Americans to Remember and Acknowledge "Facts and Lessons" of the "Genocidal Campaign" against the Armenians
Washington, DC -- In a powerfully worded letter to two of his leading Armenian American supporters, Republican presidential hopeful Texas Governor George Bush acknowledged the Armenian Genocide, called on Americans to join with him in remembering the crime committed against the Armenian people, and pledged as President to ensure that the United States properly recognizes this terrible atrocity, reported the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA).

Governor Bush's letter, addressed to Michigan community activist Edgar Hagopian and New York businessman Vasken Setrakian, who attended Harvard with the Governor, also called for continued U.S. aid to Armenia, encouraged a peaceful settlement of the Nagorno Karabagh conflict, and praised the "tremendous contribution of the Armenian community to the United States."

"We welcome Governor Bush's principled stand on the Armenian Genocide and join with him in calling upon all Americans to acknowledge both the facts and lessons of this crime against humanity," said ANCA Executive Director Aram Hamparian. "We would like, as well, to voice our community's gratitude to Vasken Setrakian and Edgar Hagopian, both of whom have done so much to share with Governor Bush the issues of pressing concern to our community. We appreciate their leadership and value their contribution to expanding the voice of Armenian Americans in the political process."

Governor Bush's rival for the Republican nomination, Arizona Senator John McCain, has yet to speak out on Armenian issues. He has remained silent, in particular, on the Armenian Genocide, despite having received an unprecedented number of postcards from Armenian Americans as part of the ANCA's million postcard campaign to leading presidential candidates - including Governor Bush, Vice President Al Gore and former New Jersey Senator Bill Bradley.

The two hundred thousand postcards addressed to Sen. McCain ask him to explain his vote in 1990 against former Senator Bob Dole's Armenian Genocide resolution and, more recently, his 1999 vote to lift the Section 907 restrictions on U.S. aid to Azerbaijan, despite Azerbaijan's failure to lift its blockades of Armenia and Nagorno Karabagh. (For more information on the ANCA postcard campaign, visit http://www.anca.org.)

In a September 1998 speech in the U.S. Senate, McCain attacked a Congressionally approved ten million dollar aid package to the American University of Armenia as an "objectionable program," and a "serious diversion of scarce resources otherwise needed for truly worthy programs." (For more information on this speech, visit http://mccain.senate.gov/frop99ap.htm.)

Provided below is the full text of Governor Bush's letter.


#####

George W. Bush for President
February 19, 2000

Mr. Edgar Hagopian
Mr. Vasken Setrakian


Dear Edgar and Vasken,

Thank you for your inquiry to my campaign regarding issues of concern to Armenian Americans.

The twentieth century was marred by wars of unimaginable brutality, mass murder and genocide. History records that the Armenians were the first people of the last century to have endured these cruelties. The Armenians were subjected to a genocidal campaign that defies comprehension and commands all decent people to remember and acknowledge the facts and lessons of an awful crime in a century of bloody crimes against humanity. If elected President, I would ensure that our nation properly recognizes the tragic suffering of the Armenian people.

The Armenian diaspora and the emergence of an independent Republic of Armenia stand as a testament to the resiliency of the Armenian people. In this new century, the United States must actively support the independence of all the nations of the Caucasus by promising the peaceful settlement of regional disputes and the economic development of the region. American assistance to Armenia to encourage the development of democracy, the rule of law and a tolerant open society is vital. It has my full support.

I am encouraged by recent discussions between the governments of Armenia and Azerbaijan. The United States should work actively to promote peace in the region and should be willing to serve as a mediator. But ultimately peace must be negotiated and sustained by the parties involved. Lasting peace can come only from agreements they judge to be in their best interests.

I appreciate the tremendous contribution of the Armenian community to the United States. The Armenian community has been and will continue to be a model of dedication to values of faith and family.

Sincerely,

[signed]
George W. Bush

So DG, I take it that my cynical supposition is correct

It may be, Fred. After all, holding an elected official to a campaign promise is generally viewed as a terrible thing to do...by elected officials.

quote:

Originally posted by DorianGreyed:
It may be, Fred. After all, holding an elected official to a campaign promise is generally viewed as a terrible thing to do...by elected officials.

Let's face it 1) the potential candidates have to get themselves selected by their party. What the selectors want, be they a committee or some local primary electorate, and what the national electorate would vote for are not necessarily the same thing, even with that part of the national electorate that prefers that party.

2) what they say in the election may bear little resemblance to the realpolitik of what they can do when elected

No surprise then that what is said early and what is said and done later are not the same.

In America your primaries seem to consist, inter alia, of a lot of attempts to appeal to disparate local interest and to any number of minority groups with clout.This must make life difficult for candidates who have an eye to what the whole national electorate , the national voters for their party, and the primary electorates in other states want and expect. This task is not made easier by the national coverage, reporting such statements to the whole country. What is said to catch one lot of local Republicans or Democrats might be electoral poison to the mass. No wonder they seem to be vague or say one thing at one time or in one place and a variant or apparent opposite of it at another time or another place.

Britain being smaller, with less interlocal differences, and certainly without many of the influential groups that show in America, this presents less of a problem.However every potential candidate has to get chosen by some local committee of the party. These committees have the opportunity to pick a candidate who appeals to their own peculiar prejudices, however incapable the candidate is, in preference to a candidate who is far more able and more in tune with the outside world.Not for nothing do the major parties insist that all potential candidates be screened and approved by the national party, then put on a list of approved potential candidates before being put before a committee of locals.And, from time to time, the national parties 'parachute in' particularly strong potential candidates, people who are regarded highly by the national leadership, with very heavy indications that the national party wants him or her (though, naturally, they would accept the final judgment of the committee )

After all that the candidate, if elected, still has the problems referred to at the head of this post. If they have not said all things to all men at the selection stage, then again at the election stage, it would be a surprise so if they did not say and do something different after election. At least they are consistent