The Diaspora Ministry of the Republic of Armenia invited a small group of scholars and analysts to Yerevan last December to discuss the diaspora’s changing role in relation to the homeland. The participants in the “Changing Diaspora in an Ever-changing World” roundtable came from Argentina, Armenia, Germany, Lebanon, Russia, Ukraine, and the United States.
The discussion centered on the formation of the diaspora, current challenges, Armenia-diaspora collaboration, improved links for closer cooperation between Armenia and the diaspora, and the quest for new working mechanisms and perspectives.
Excerpts from my presentation at the meeting follow.
“The diaspora encountered a completely new set of circumstances after Armenia’s independence. The sudden realization of the long-cherished dream of free Armenia caught many diasporans by surprise. New words appeared in their vocabulary: Artsakh (Karabagh), earthquake, blockade, protocol, opposition, coalition government, regime change.
“Most diasporans had a hard time distinguishing between the actions of an individual, group, or organization and the rights and obligations of a state. At the same time, Armenia’s new leaders could not fully comprehend the patriotic sentiments, wishes, and desires of Diasporan Armenians, causing a disconcerting rift between the two sides.
“Complicating matters, the diaspora is not a monolithic group, but is comprised of distinct subsets, having taken shape at different times in foreign lands under various cultural and linguistic influences.
“When asked by journalists in Armenia about the diaspora’s views on a particular issue, I have difficulty answering such a question. How can anyone encapsulate the diverse views of seven million diasporans? To reflect the opinion of the majority of the diaspora, one would need to form a pan-Armenian body, either by expanding the Hayastan All-Armenian Fund’s functions beyond fundraising or creating a brand new structure that would represent Armenians worldwide, except those in Armenia and Artsakh, based on the principle of ‘one man, one vote.’ The elected representatives would have the right to speak in the name of all Diaspora Armenians and meet periodically with the leadership of Armenia and Artsakh to consult and coordinate their priorities on pan-Armenian issues.
“Leaders of all three wings of the Armenian nation (Armenia, Artsakh, and Diaspora) can then discuss their respective positions, and agree on the role each would play. Such a division of labor is preferable over unending internal feuds and conflicts that sometimes take place, as was the case during the signing of the Armenia-Turkey protocols.
“It is incumbent upon Armenia’s leadership to be more sensitive on issues that are important for Diaspora Armenians and consult with them before taking final decisions.
“Understandably, Armenia’s leaders are not obliged to take orders from anyone outside the country’s borders. While having the final say over all matters, they nevertheless have the moral duty and obligation to consider the views of key diasporan organizations, in the absence of a diaspora-wide elected body. In any case, Armenia’s authorities are responsible before the nation for their actions. They are praised when taking the right decisions and criticized when they do not.
“It must be stated that an elective diaspora-wide structure, no matter how difficult to establish, would be far more inclusive and representative than appointed leaders—despite their devoted efforts—who merely represent their respective members. It is imperative to include large segments of our people in all activities, so that we become more effective in our endeavors, particularly at a time when Azerbaijan and Turkey are organizing their diasporas and spending tens of millions of dollars to undermine our just demands on the eve of the Genocide Centennial.
“As we often state: ‘Azerbaijan has oil, Georgia has a sea, and Armenia has a diaspora!’ However, a disorganized and dwindling diaspora would be of little value for our national cause. It can neither preserve itself nor be of any assistance to the homeland.
“We must do everything possible to have a powerful homeland and a strong diaspora. The survival of each is dependent on the vitality of the other. Despite the valiant efforts of the Diaspora Ministry, we must realize that the magnitude of what needs to be done is so enormous that it exceeds the capabilities of any one ministry. There is a clear need for the concerted efforts of Armenia’s entire leadership to make Diaspora Armenians feel welcome and at home!”
Harut Sassounian
While I agree with Mr. Sassounian’s comments generally, it seems to me that he should also have stressed the financial support which the diaspora has given in the past and is expected to give in the future, as one of the prime reasons that the government in Armenia should listen to the voice of the diaspora.As problem -laden as the government of Armenia is today, can you imagine the even more dreadful condition it would suffer under if the diaspora had not provided financial and moral aid to it during the times of the earthquake, the Artsakh war and its present financial crisis. The Armenian government should not forget who holds the spoon from which it sups.
How will the recent events in Ukraine affect the recognition of genocide by the United States? Will the US be more reluctant not to offend a vital ally?
The diaspora should play a supportive role in the development of Armenia but while they are not convinced that the funds they are providing reach the less well off they will be reluctant to make significant contributions.
Also Armenian owned companies in the Diaspora are not encouraged to set up branches in Armenia because of the instability caused by the war with Azerbajian and the corruption that exists. If these two areas are addressed by Armenia’s leaders Armenia will flourish in the long term. The diaspora’s political based opinions are not really all that relevant and because of disagreements could be counterproductive.
With the cushy oligarch system why would the Armenian leadership even want to interject the Diaspora? Wouldn’t that be a threat to the current Soviet style corrupt system? YES!
All three above comments are in order,correct.That is exactly why not much co-relationship is at present in force.
In order to set up a LI-Irav(fully-fledged) relationship leverage or rather a balancing mechanism is required.That will be solution,when Homeland authorities will by and by relax their association with Diaspora. In this connection I am posting yet another important challenging article to many in direct email format,or as an attachment.Our present so called self-elected or by a few friends should not be worried,as my thesis may automatically include some if they have THE MERIT to be there as such.For otherwise the present unpleasant situation will continue. We need fresh blood and New ideas in order to get the vehicle moving…
The order of items on Armenia’s agenda is not the same as the order of items in Diaspora’s agenda. Although there are similar items on both agendas, the order is not the same.
For Armenia, the number one item on their agenda is “The survival, physical and otherwise, of the country”. The recognition of the Genocide ranks 2, 3 or 4 for Armenia.
For the Diaspora, the number one item has been, for a long time, “The recognition of the Genocide”. The survival and thriving of Armenia ranks next probably but not the first order of agenda.
It is not that the two groups do not care for each other’s agenda, it’s just that the order of priorities are different.
Creating a governing body for the Diaspora will institutionalize the innate difference that exists between the two groups. And once it is institutionalized, it is very hard to go back. Look at what happened to the two church bureaucracies that were created in the past; it couldn’t be gotten rid of when there was possibility for it to go away.
good observation
The institution amb is writing about(above) in my version is,The Supreme council of the Diaspora.A necessity I have delved into many a time over.This comprised of or articulated to have or be in FIVE Departments.
1. Legal-Political in France(Euro Armenian Centre) at Strasbourg,next to RA delegation.Not sitting with them ,but in same town.
2.The Economic , in Geneva, Switzerland,also (future) NATIONAL INVESTMENT TRUST FUND OR FOUNDATION.
3.Executive in NY(near Ra delegation,as above,
4.The Social Issues and (future)Repatriation organizing(near abroad)
5.The spiritual in St. Etchmiadzin in conjunction with great House Above has been deeply studied by self after our World armenian (3) Congresses,did not have a mechanism to get it rolling.Moreover, the structure thus institutionalized -as one can note is spread over geographically, as per needs of utilizing all of our efforts in those places,most important.Hope it will come to pass….if the Armenians will at long last see that they cannot be full fledged partners with Homeland if not gathered according capabilities and elect people for their MERITS not for being as at present, the BBB forming triumvurate(hint is Ara Baliozian´s Bishops, Benefactors and Bosses!!!these will no doubt wish to release their position.Welcome let them stay so(myu viewpoint) but we those of us who crave for INSTITUTIONALIZATION, in an acceptable way ,that of being ELECTED through REAL PARTICIPATION AND REPRESENTATION,not the man on the street being wooed to vote for the BBB´s.
Best Hasgcoghin
Mr Sassounian and others keep advocating that we should have an elected body representing the diaspora. The question is why? For what purpose?
a) There is no other country in the world that has an elected body of its nationals not living in the homeland. There are huge numbers of Italians, Greeks, Poles, Indians, Pakistanis, Irish who live in different countries of the world, and non of them has such an elected body.
2- Non of the porposals, suggestions provides any concrete ideas what the role of this body is going to be, other than the generalities about improved communication, dialogue and the role of the Diaspora.
3- In Armenia,we have 7 parties, with 131 members in the Parliament.
The 131 members so far cannot come together to make a decision, take an action, pass a law that benefits the populace and removes the ills (no need to list them, as they are well known and articulated upon) that the country faces.
4- The President and his Republican Party have 69 seats and absolute majority. They have been passing all the laws that they see fit and ignoring the opinions of 62 opposition parliamenterians.
On what basis do we believe that they will listen to a Diaspora elected body that has no legal status in Armenia.
5- The opposition has 62 members of Parliament. They are totally fragmented. I do not recall a single time, when the opposition has come together and proposed a meaningful and productive legislation that benefits the country. All we hear about is one party’s, or another’s criticism of a piece of legislation without proposing viable alternatives.
6- Sassounian himself admits that the Diaspora is not monolithic group.In the diaspora we are fragmented also. Look at the number of organizations we have. The big majority of them do a great job helping and assisting the communities they are in. But are they
unified? No. The only time the Diaspora gets together and works together is when we are dealing with issues touching the Genocide, or when we sadly face a catasrophe in the Homeland ( Eathquake) or in a region (recently Syria). We also fortunately we have many NGOs that are doing excellent work in Armenia. Sadly, they all make a contribution but it is not enough due to the enormity of the task.
How can we get all these under one umbrella of an elected body?
7- Finally, what elective process are we going to use to elect this body? What will be the representation criteria? who will oversee the elections? where will the seat of this body be? What will the authority and the power of this body be?
These are highly complex questions. The answers are not easy.
The concept might be grand but accomplishing it is not realistic.
May be the advocates of this idea can come together and prepare a white paper on how we can get there. It should not be that difficult, as it seems the idea has mainly percolated in California.
Vart Adjemian