‘Hai Tahd’: New Priorities for a New Agenda (Part II)

Part I discussed the seven injustices that are represented by Hai Tahd. Part II will suggest new priorities for a new agenda for the ARF and the Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) in the United States.

The bedrock of Hai Tahd is the genocide. No one can dispute that statement. However, the level of priority and resources that are dedicated to it can and should be disputed.  The latest disappointment in failing to obtain Congressional approval of a genocide recognition resolution, as well as President Obama’s obstinate refusal to use the word genocide in his April 24th message, would suggest that something is amiss.

The something amiss is having elevated genocide recognition as the sine qua non of Hai Tahd. No one questions that passage of a favorable resolution by the United States Congress or any national legislature is an important moral victory. However, there is a significant distinction between legislatures simply recognizing the Ottoman-Turkish government’s systematic murder of the Armenian people as genocide, and recognizing the Ottoman-Turkish government’s systematic murder of the Armenian people as genocide and Turkey’s legal and moral obligation for reparation and restitution.

More immediate and pressing issues exist that must be confronted. This does not refer to increasing economic, military, or humanitarian aid to Armenia or to Karabagh by a few million dollars annually. This amount, given the billions of dollars in foreign aid routinely budgeted by Congress, is the result of intense lobbying by the ANCA supported by the Congressional Armenian Caucus duly reported in press releases each year. Are we being overly critical if we question our effectiveness?

Mission one of a new agenda

The ARF in the United States and the ANCA occupy a unique position within the organizational and geographic framework of Armenians worldwide. The one million-plus Armenians in the United States represent the second largest concentration of Armenians in the diaspora after Russia. In terms of per capita income, education, and professional achievement, they represent an important segment of the Armenian demographic universe. Unfortunately a high percentage of these Armenians are either ambivalent with respect to Armenian issues or completely detached from the Armenian community.

An important mission that the ARF and the ANCA can undertake is to develop programs that seek to energize targeted segments of this population. This requires something more than press releases, emails, mailings, and events that appeal primarily to the very small percentage of the population continually relied upon for support. That there is a need for intensive outreach programs is obvious.

Observation one: Our fund raising results are less than stellar. Is it beyond belief that we should be able to raise at least $5 million annually? People give when they accept the urgency of the cause. They give when they can accept how the solicited funds will be used. And they give based on the results achieved or effectiveness.

Observation two: We attract very few “new” Armenians from this one million-plus universe to our various events whether at the local, regional, or national levels. More telling has been our limited success in connecting with that segment of the population from their late 20’s to mid-40’s who identify themselves as “young professionals.” A recent panel discussion co-sponsored by the AGBU Young Professionals and the ARF “Sardarabad” Gomideh in Watertown, Mass., was an excellent beginning bringing these two groups together for the first time. Few of these young adults knew what the ARF was about. Do we consider it important to inform and educate our people as to our philosophy, our purpose, and our methods in confronting the issues facing the Armenian nation both internationally and domestically? Is it remotely possible that most Armenian Americans are not cognizant of these problems?

Observation three: Have we noted the lack of interest by our youth in becoming involved? Or the number of AYF Juniors, AYF Seniors, and Homenetmen members who opt at some later time in life to join the ARF Gomidehs or the Armenian Relief Society (ARS) chapters? Is it possible that we lack a compelling message? Or that we do not have a relevant one? Today is a far different world for our young people than, say, 20 years ago. Have we as an organization accommodated these changes? The strength of the ARF comes from the support derived from our people, and that support is directly related to their understanding and acceptance of the ARF.

A question of revolutionary fervor

Could it be that we have lost the revolutionary fervor that was the hallmark of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation? Historically we were a party of action and a party of ideas and ideals. It was never a question of whether we could or could not. We believed that we could right the wrongs that the nation had suffered. We believed that we could protect the interests of the nation. We believed that we could create a system of justice and equality for the Armenian worker and his family. It was the faith we had in ourselves individually and collectively that fueled the passion to serve and to protect the interests of our people. The ARF had a vision to fulfill, a vision that literally saved the survivors of the genocide from oblivion in the diaspora. I do not believe that same vision or passion currently exists.

Mission two of a new agenda

Our people must understand exactly what Hai Tahd represents and the role the ARF has in protecting those interests. The ARF in the United States has an opportunity to influence the policies and objectives ultimately adopted at the highest level of leadership. We must strive to transform the ARF in the United States into a dynamic, cohesive political organization capable of influencing the leadership because of our successes in outreach programs, fundraising, and in expanding our base of support. Continually having our admirable efforts at genocide recognition rejected does not inspire confidence in our operation. Not only are Artsakh and Javakhk of greater concern, but their favorable resolution will have an immediate and positive impact on the Armenian nation, Hai Tahd, and the ARF.

Mission three of a new agenda

To define the Karabagh issue. What is the geographic relationship of Karabagh to Artsakh, or why are the Madrid Principles that are proposed as the basis for a negotiated settlement biased against Karabagh’s interests? Have we done all we can to acquaint our population in the United States with the history of this region and the inequities our people suffered during the 70 years under the jurisdiction of Azerbaijan?

We have allowed Turkey and Azerbaijan to frame the issue as Armenian irredentism. Artsakh gaining de jure independence (at the very least, not losing its present de facto independent status) is one of several immediate issues facing the Armenian nation and the ARF. Dashnaks were members of the Karabagh government that declared independence and the ARF was an active participant in Karabagh’s war for independence. The reversion of Artsakh to Azeri control would be a serious defeat for Armenia and the ARF. If Artsakh is beyond saving, what of the remaining injustices represented by Hai Tahd? The various interests that represent American society—business leaders, educators, journalists, advocacy groups, and the Congressional Armenian Caucus, to name but a few—must be made aware of all aspects of the Karabagh issue if success is to be ours.

Mission four of a new agenda

To monitor and publicize the deplorable situation of the Javakhk Armenians and to seek assistance not only to alleviate their condition, but to support their legitimate demands as citizens of Georgia. Again, the plight of the Javakhkahayer (Javakhk Armenians) is not well known within the Armenian community. Conflicting reports define the situation in terms that benefit Georgia. An International Crisis Group briefing dated May 23, 2011 states: “Although Tbilisi has significantly invested in infrastructure and acquiesced to the use of the Armenian language in schools and public administration Javakheti still faces serious problems.”

A Yerkir Union of NGO’s for Repatriation and Settlement press release dated April 18, 2011 challenges the U.S. State Department’s 2010 Human Rights Report on Georgia, claiming that “…the facts of violation of the rights of the Armenians of Javakheti have been presented in an incomplete and distorted manner.” The areas that the Yerkir Union press release noted cover a range of economic, political, and cultural violations that are more serious than those mentioned in the 2010 report on Georgia or in the International Crisis Group Briefing. If this policy of forced acculturation, population resettlement, and economic and political marginalization continues, historic Armenian Javakhk will be irretrievably lost within several generations.

Genocide recognition within context of ‘Hai Tahd’

The demand that Turkey should, as the successor state to the Ottoman-Turkish Empire, recognize its responsibility for the Armenian Genocide must continue. However this demand may be articulated in the future, it should be presented within the framework of Hai Tahd, not as an isolated injustice that can be resolved by passage of a Congressional resolution recognizing the murder of 1.5 million Armenian men, women, and children as genocide. The ARF and the ANCA should set their agendas to undertake those missions that have greatest urgency and significance to Hai Tahd and the nation.

The historic role of the ARF

The ARF is the principal counterweight to the government of the Republic of Armenia. Whether in Armenia or in the diaspora, it fulfills the role of the loyal opposition. During the century from its inception in 1890 to the founding of the second independent Republic of Armenia in 1991, the ARF ably and singularly represented the interests of the Armenian people. Whatever shortcomings or failures it may have experienced, the dedication, vision, and accomplishments of the ARF during this period cannot be legitimately challenged. The ARF and the ANCA has served its people with distinction, but both entities should take the opportunity to set agendas that not only address the immediate issues confronting our nation, but seek to expand its influence well beyond its traditional base of support.

• Bio
• Latest Posts

Michael Mensoian

Michael Mensoian, J.D./Ph.D, is professor emeritus in Middle East and political geography at the University of Massachusetts, Boston, and a retired major in the U.S. army. He writes regularly for the Armenian Weekly.

Latest posts by Michael Mensoian (see all)

• Facing the Reality that is Artsakh - August 6, 2020
• Tourism: An Economic Tide That Can Lift All “Boats” - January 29, 2020
• The Legacy of the Hairenik and the Armenian Weekly - January 7, 2020