We are responding to Harut Sassounian’s recent commentary, entitled “There Is a Time to Sue, and a Time to Settle.” While we agree there is a time to settle, that time was years ago. We know first-hand the Assembly sought to resolve this matter amicably and without public fanfare. The fact is the Assembly did not seek litigation. The fact is the Assembly did not initiate the lawsuit in Federal Court. The fact is on more than one occasion the Assembly agreed to settlement terms, only to have them rejected or changed at the last minute by Mr. Cafesjian. None of these facts are even mentioned in Sassounian’s commentary.
Harut’s article mistakenly indicates this case resulted from “an attempt by Armenian Assembly leaders to take control of the multi-million dollar museum buildings…” This is simply not true. The fact is the Assembly transferred the properties to the Armenian Genocide Museum and Memorial (AGMM), a separate organization. What Harut also doesn’t say is the Judge awarded all the properties to Mr. Cafesjian and his foundation without any requirement whatsoever to actually build a Genocide Museum. The Judge also made it a point on page 1 of her decision to say she was not expressing any opinion about the Armenian Genocide, and instead described it as controversial.
Despite what Sassounian’s article says, Assembly leaders did not attempt to “exclude Cafesjian from any decision-making powers as a Board member of the AGM&M” as asserted in the article. It is simply not the case. The fact is Mr. Cafesjian presided as Chairman of AGMM from 2003 to 2006, and controlled AGMM.
The article also mistakenly indicates that the Grant agreement required the Assembly “to develop the museum by Dec. 1, 2010.” Again, this is simply not the case. The fact is it was AGMM’s role to develop the project.
It is also an indisputable fact Mrs. Mathevosian’s major gift was due to her allegiance to and friendship with the Armenian Assembly of America, and was not the result of any relationship with Mr. Cafesjian. This is important and completely overlooked by Sassounian’s apparent lack of research, presumably prompted by the Cafesjian-side to write a negative piece against the Assembly.
Also, the article makes absolutely no mention of the serious and disturbing conflict of interest we feel exists and has been established between Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly and Mr. Cafesjian through their collection and promotion of contemporary studio glass art, including their joint contribution of a Libensky piece (the same artist Mr. Cafesjian testified about at trial) to the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Is it any wonder the Judge gave preference to her fellow art collector and connoisseur who shares both a passion and has a stake in the same field of modern art, and decided in Cafesjian’s favor? This is an important material fact and its omission from Sassounian’s article is glaring.
Unlike many of us who have been life-long activists for the Armenian cause, to us, Mr. Cafesjian was an unknown until he approached Hirair Hovnanian, and indicated he would like to become involved, initially in Armenia. It was Hirair who introduced Cafesjian to the leadership in Armenia. Then, having received some degree of recognition, he turned on Hirair; and instead of partnering and participating with the Assembly, Cafesjian went out on his own. The final act of ingratitude was Cafesjian’s lawsuit. Cafesjian, by the way, continues to sue the Assembly, the latest lawsuit filed in Florida earlier this year, while the DC litigation was pending before the Judge. Talk about a “Time to Settle” and a “Time to Sue.” Harut should have been clear on who was suing and who was seeking settlement.
Joyce Philibosian Stein
Joe Stein
Indian Wells, Calif.
Guest Contributor
We are in desparate need of establishing a new paradigm in dealing with conflict. Traditionally(and currently), when conflict occurs(e.g. the Museum litigation), we engage in countless point and counter point public debates that rarely resolve anything; except leading to further polarization.
I am not sure if Mr. and Mrs. Stein are officially speaking for the Assembly as the title of the article suggests. I do do not know them personally, but understand that they are prominent members of the Assembly and long standing supporters of Armenian causes. I applaud their commitment.
It is not for any of us to judge each other’s intentions. I will assume that those affiliated with Mr. Casfesjian and the Assembly have a heartfelt commitment to the Armenian people. Even if I was faced with information that suggests otherwise, I must consider the implications of engaging in further conflict. Is winning the argument, debate or litigation in the best interests of the Armenian people? Perhaps the olive branch is in our best interests?
The Assembly must consider the value of continuing the legal process; given the current status. Further litigation will probably not unify our people. Leadership and humility will. Let’s face it. We usually interpret these issues based on our current affiliations. I will not pretend to have a full knowledge of the facts in this sad issue. I do know that what is in the interests of the Armenian people is all that matters. The problem is that we all have an interpretation of what is in the best interests. In this particular case, it is clear…what is the best way to get the Museum built?
This is not about attacking the credibility of either party. Our community needs both of these leaders. The philanthropy of Mr. Hovnanian is legendary and as an Armenian I am grateful for his generosity. Mr. Casfejian has made major contributions to our community that have that reflect his generosity. Their commitment is a blessing. I am praying they find a way to reconcile.
Well said Stepan:
these things sometimes take a life of their own and people involved don’t even remember what started it all. Usually it is something insignificant that grows into a major conflict over time.
The infamous Hatfield–McCoy feud was rekindled – with deadly consequences – because of some insignificant dispute about a hog.
I agree Stepan. Let’s pray that the two sides will come to see their way through this conflict to a fruitful resolution that will serve the cause.
It is always a good time, especially now, to let our faith guide us. The solution to this problem is not in litigation or political positioning by groups, but in forgiveness, love and reconciliation. When we truly embrace these as the teachings of our Lord and not disregard them as naive, we will be blessed. Whenever the Armenian people lead with our Christian faith , we are always rewarded. We always focus on the death and destruction caused by the genocide, but rarely speak of the miracle of our survival and recovery. God has blessed our people with this gift. If we are to debate the building of the museum dedicated to the genocide, let us be guided by the faith that has granted us the priviledge of being in a position to remember and carry forward.
Hmm, I did wonder why the Armenian Assembly has been/is supportive of the USA State Department’s stance – opposing, for example, ANCA stance for Hai Tahd. I attended an event many years ago, when the ANCA had been invited to come to the White House for discussions. ANCA accepted but their leadership requested that the Armenian Assembly attend as well. During the course of the meeting it became obvious that discussions were addressed exclusively to the ANCA (obviously, the Assembly, although invited, was not included as a participant). Leaving this meeting, outside the door of the White House, I happened to be there to witness the following: Mr. Hrair Hovnanian, turned to our ANCAers, Aram Hamparian and Mike Mahdessian insulted the two dedicated young men, shouting they were TRAITORS. Shocked… everyone walked away. That event has stayed with me all these years while observing actions of the obvious misdirection of Assembly’s frequent stances over years. Too, the Assembly shall have done much for Haiastan – as we all have – but at times there have been actions which leave much to be examined… much to be wondered at. For example, the Armenian Assembly’s stance with the USA State Department… Why? Is Assembly flattered have contacts with the USA State Department??
I thought by now it was known that the US State Dept. set up the aaa to create an artificial divide in the Armenian-American community. Looks they its worked.
I used to contribute to both the AAA and the ANCA, but if the Assembly is, in my opinion, squandering my interest and money on embarassing and wasteful litigation/suits I have chosen to not contribute for law suits. It’s not getting a museum built and operating, albeit that’s another matter. There’s a lot of backroom politics yet to come before this museum is opens…
The AAA has towed the State Department’s line and supported their policies towards the Armenia and Armenians for a long time. It is well-known that the AAA takes its directions from the State Department. A brief review of its activities and announcements, with the most recent their support of Nancy Pelosi for withdrawing the “Armenian Genocide” resolution speaks volumes. In my humble opinion this events that have led to major postponement of the construction of the Armenian Genocide museum are not accidental. They are attempts to delay as long as possible and possibly destroy the prospects of building the museum. The best blow to the assembly will be the actual construction of the Armenian Genocide museum. All Armenians should rally around this goal and support the construction of the museum. Symbolically this will heavily damage the denialists posture.