Do you think that America made a mistake by not having a representative last weekend at the Unity Walk in Paris? The unity walk was the largest ever demonstration in France and was attended by more then 40 nations, many of them world powers, but none of them was the U.S. It seems interesting to me after suffering thru 9/11 that this was not an event that was supported. I don't know, is it just that we as a society look at things like this as if they are just an event similar to Farm Aid or Live Aid? Events that are nice but attendance not always necessary?
Yes, he did. The western world was trying to show some solidarity in the face of one of the worst terrorist attacks in modern history. And the POTUS was a no-show. He could have at least sent a senior official, but he didn't. The action was intentional and sent a very bad message.
I think his non-attendance speaks volumes too. It was pretty poor manners too, considering the global support the USA received after 9/11. His absence was certainly noticed by the rest of the world and I wonder what his excuse is?
I think that sometimes taking a break from activities going around is a good thing. It depends on the kind of relationship that the nations share. I am not saying that this function was not important. It cannot however be classified as an emergency where failure to appear is an insult.
I would disagree. Even if he couldn't have attended in person (and apparently he had a clear schedule), he could have sent a representative. The Attorney General was actually in Paris that day! Surely he could have attended? The global media has jumped on this, describing it as a "U.S. snub to the French". This article is quite interesting and tells you more about the situation. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-anti-terror-march-joined-global-leaders.html
POTUS was a key element there and his presence should've been there. Now it created a feeling we (europeans) are separated from the US. When EU has problems, US stays out of it.
I think that the US and France relations were never the same since the events after the 9.11 and how the US jumped to the Iraq war and these are just still the consequences.
It is an interesting point that no senior official was sent to represent the US. As others have said, perhaps it opens a window into the kind of relationship that the USA and France have with each other. But despite that, the whole purpose of the march was bringing all these leaders and countries together, despite their differences. And I would have thought that a country like the US might stand up for the freedom of speech and also for the solidarity of the people. I mean, even the Russian foreign minister was there, so surely they could have at least sent the Attorney General?
Please keep in mind that France has not been supportive of American foreign policy. When it came to Operation Iraqi Freedom where were the French? The U.S. Ambassador to France, Jane Hartley, did participate in the unity march. Furthermore there were security concerns. Could you imagine sending the American President into a hostile environment on such short notice, with six known vicious terrorist still on the lose and unaccounted for? At the end of the day the world knows where America stands on this issue. We have sacrificed treasure and blood in the fight against terror. Not to mention the loss of 2,800 of our civilians on 9/11.
Maybe the U.S wanted to avoid all the hypocrisy? Thousands are being murdered in Syria and Iraq by ISIS but we see no fancy marches in protest against what's happening there. Obama didn't make a mistake when he failed to attend the Paris solidarity march. Either the world is against terrorism or against terrorism in the West. Where do you stand?