ANCA-WR Chair Nora Hovsepian Testifies in Support of Landmark Resolution (AJR 32); Full Assembly Vote Set for May 8
SACRAMENTO, Calif.—The California State Assembly Rules Committee on cast a historic vote on May 5 supporting and encouraging Artsakh’s (Nagorno Karabagh) continuing efforts to develop as a free and independent nation, and urging the President and Congress of the United States to support the self-determination and democratic independence of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, reported the Armenian National Committee of America – Western Region. AJR 32, introduced by Assemblymember Mike Gatto, was adopted by a vote of 9 yes, 1 no, and 1 member who did not vote and will now move to the full Assembly floor for a vote scheduled for May 8, 2014.
“We are grateful to Assemblymember Mike Gatto for introducing this important resolution calling on the state of California to take a moral stand in line with American ideals of self-determination and freedom by recognizing the independence of Artsakh,” states ANCA-WR Chair, Nora Hovsepian, who offered testimony in support of the resolution at the committee hearing. “We look forward to California joining the States of Rhode Island, Maine, Massachusetts and Louisiana in supporting the righteous quest of our brethren in Artsakh for a life of peace and prosperity on their ancestral lands.”
AJR 32 lead author, Assemblymember Gatto was joined by Co-Author Assemblymember Katcho Achadjian (R-Calif.), Assemblymembers Adrin Nazarian (D-Calif.), Scott Wilk (R-Calif.) and Cheryl Brown (D-Calif.) in offering testimony in support of the measure. Joining Hovsepian in testifying on behalf of California’s over 1 million Armenian American community were Alina Nalbantyan, who hails from the Shahoumian region of Artsakh, and Sevak Khatchatourian from the Armenian Council of America.
The Armenian National Committee of America – Western Region (ANCA-WR) has been instrumental in the passage of AJR 32, working closely with Assemblymember Mike Gatto and the Rules Committee to ensure a sound understanding of the facts. “It has been my privilege to work with the leaders of the local Armenian American community and their outstanding representatives on this important resolution,” said Gatto. The ANCA-WR launched an action alert on this resolution and in a matter of a few days, Armenian-Americans from all parts of California contacted their representatives on the Rules Committee urging their members to vote in favor of AJR 32, in support of the Republic of Artakh’s independence. More than 2,500 letters were sent to the members of the Rules Committee.
California is home to tens of thousands of Armenian-Americans who are refugees of pogroms against Armenians in Sumgait (1988), Kirovabad (1988), and Baku (1990), and the ethnic-cleansing of the Armenian population of Azerbaijan. These pogroms set the stage for two decades of aggression by Azerbaijan, during which it launched and lost a war against Nagorno Karabakh, and later used its oil wealth to buy a massive military arsenal that its leaders, to this day, vow to use to renew their attempts to conquer a Christian people that have lived on these lands for thousands of years and, after great challenges, has flourished in freedom from Soviet oppression for more than 20 years.
“I stand with the freedom loving people of Artsakh in support of AJR 32. We will continue to speak out until Artsakh is free,” stated Assemblymember Scott Wilk who set the record straight during the hearing and refuted the fallacies presented by the Azeri lobby.
Since declaring independence in 1991, Artsakh has successfully conducted five parliamentary and five presidential elections that have been praised by international observers as free, fair and transparent. The most recent presidential election held in July 2012 was favorably received by more than 80 international observers from two dozen countries, including the United States. Election observers included the former Rhode Island Attorney General Patrick Lynch and Canadian Parliamentarian Jim Karygianni.
On Thursday, May 8, AJR 32 will be voted on by the full California State Assembly.
Guest Contributor
Not to be a downer, but why on earth would random states like Louisiana and Maine care about a far-away separatist movement? Put differently, *how much money did ANCA have to spend on state legislators to get these votes to occur*? Wouldn’t all that money be put to much better use by providing micro-credit loans to small businesses in Armenia?
We in the diaspora need to make one distinction absolutely clear: are we doing things that help Armenia, or are we doing things that just keep our diaspora identity relevant?
On the contrary, you are being a downer by criticizing states such as Louisiana and Maine, who support the Artsakh people’s right to self-determination and independence. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with states such as Maine and Louisiana, showing sympathy to the human rights of the people of Artsakh. As a matter of fact, that’s quite admirable of them.
In terms of how much money did ANCA spend on state legislators to vote in recognition of Artsakh’s independence, the answer is zero. What ANCA precisely does, is they educate these state legislators on various Armenian issues, such as the Artsakh issue. Don’t try and make ANCA out to be like the Azerbaijani government, who spends an enormous amount of its oil money in a desperate attempt to persuade U.S. state legislators, as well as other foreign state legislators, in supporting its extreme lies.
{“far-away separatist movement?”}
‘separatist’ ?
Isn’t that the vile term Turkbaijani invadonomads use for our indigenous Armenian brothers and sisters of Artsakh ?
You slipped up, didn’t you.
{“ Put differently, *how much money did ANCA have to spend on state legislators to get these votes to occur*?”}
How do you know ANCA spent _any_ money, quote, ‘on state legislators to get these votes to occur’ ?
ANCA is a grass-roots organization: if you were actually in the Armenian Diaspora, you’d know that.
Turks and Turkbaijanis are the ones that buy votes in US: maybe that’s why you slipped up, again ?
Your ‘schtick’ is not adding anything to the discourse (…that sentence sounds vaguely familiar: where have I read that before, I wonder…).
Sorry, Avery, you don’t have the right to speak because you were not fighting on the front lines in 1988.
But I like how you go back to your tired refrain by questioning whether I am part of the Armenian Diaspora: if anyone doesn’t agree with you, deny their right to speak or deny their right to be part of the group.
Dictator.
And to defend my comment on the merits:
Regarding “separatism”: in the eyes of local politicians, Artsakh is (most likely) a separatist movement from Azerbaijan.
In reality, it is a separatist movement from the USSR.
The over-sensitivity to the term “separatist” is in any case misplaced. All independence movements or self-determination movements are by definition separatist movements.
Also to Yerevanian: I was not criticizing these states. I was rather raising the question as to whether their symbolic allegiance was the best use of our money, time and energy.
And regarding lobbying. The objection to Turkey and Azerbaijan spending money on politicians is not the fact that money is being spent. American politics is run on bribery, and that’s a fact. The objection rather is that these are foreign countries trying to influence the American government, and it is likely that these countries do not have America’s best interests at heart. That’s a far cry from American citizens of Armenian descent exercising their rights as members of the American democratic polity.
Alex,
There are actually numerous local politicians (United States), who don’t view Artsakh as being a separatist movement from Azerbaijan. As a result of being properly educated on the Artsakh issue, those particular politicians recognize Artsakh’s independence. As you noticed, California, the biggest and most important state in the United States, has recognized the Artsakh Republic’s independence, making it the fifth state to do so.
How can the Artsakh people’s claim to independence be a separatist movement from the USSR, when it doesn’t even exist anymore? The USSR, dissolved in December of 1991.
I’m again noticing that you’re trying to insist that the sympathy of those five U.S. states to the Artsakh people’s cause, is at least partly a result of the money spent on those particular states by ANCA. Just because an enormous amount of bribery exists in American politics, does not in any way imply that ANCA happened to bribe the politicians of California, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Maine, into recognizing Artsakh’s independence. Once again, ANCA has never spent any money on state legislators to vote in recognition of Artsakh’s independence. What ANCA precisely did, is they educated these particular state legislators on the Artsakh issue. Out of curiosity, since you happen to be convinced that a small organization like ANCA has been paying money to the politicians of these various states to vote in favor of the recognition of Artsakh’s independence, where could they possibly get the money to make that happen? Do you realize the huge sum of money you would need in order to pay off the politicians of these various states? Where could that small organization of ANCA, possibly obtain such a huge sum of money? However, the Azerbaijani government with all its oil, along with the Turkish government who’s made an enormous fortune off the stolen assets of the Armenian Genocide victims, have plenty of money to spend on politicians both in the United States and worldwide to vote in support of their extreme lies.
{“ And to defend my comment on the merits:”}
(Alex // May 8, 2014 at 5:33 pm //)
Your comments have no merits.
You slipped-up and inadvertently showed your hand, and are now desperately attempting to recover by digging deeper into the hole you are in.
Even after [Yerevanian] and myself pointed out what kind of organization ANCA is and what it does, you insist on insinuating that somehow ANCA ‘buys’ votes: {“ Put differently, *how much money did ANCA have to spend on state legislators to get these votes to occur*?”}, {“…was the best use of our money..”}.
Your bizzaro suggestion that ANCA get involved in “… providing micro-credit loans to small businesses in Armenia” indicates your complete lack of understanding what the mission of ANCA is.
Or, something else.
Since ANCA, a grassroots organization, has been very effective in promoting the Independence of Artsakh in US and has been very effective in blunting Anti-Armenian efforts in US by Turkophile lobbyists, one has to wonder why would someone who claims to be Armenian-American insist that ANCA lose focus and get involved in illogical peripheral things like “micro loans”, for example.
And the fact that some actors, or interests, or politicians use the vile term ‘separatist’ when referring to Artsakh’s indigenous Armenians is no excuse for someone who claims to be Armenian to repeat Turkbaijani propaganda: one who throws out foreign invaders from one’s ancestral lands cannot possibly be a, quote, ‘separatist’.
How many countries that resisted and threw out Nazi invaders were called ‘separatist’ ?
How many countries that threw off the Ottoman Turk yoke in WW1 were called ‘separatist’ ?
Your disingenuous attempt to try to explain it away by linking the term to USSR, and other bizarre justifications and contrived definitions are also in the same keep-digging vein.
Regards.
Your friendly neighborhood Armenian-American Dictator.
Artsakh was a separatist (independence) movement from the USSR. It declared independence from Azerbaijan SSR and then once again from the USSR. Azerbaijan tries to conflate its two independence movements. It claims that only one state, Azerbaijan, emerged from the USSR, and then Artsakh tried to separate from independent Azerbaijan. In reality, two independent states emerged from the USSR: Artsakh and Azerbaijan. Artsakh was never a part of independent Azerbaijan. It was a part of USSR, from which it declared independence (or separation). Hence, separatist movement.
This is explained rather persuasively by President Kocharian (in Russian) before the Council of Europe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cS_HjaE7gC8
And regarding lobbying, I have stood in Times Square and personally heard Harut Sassounian state that the Armenian community provided votes “and financial support” for politicians and legislators. He makes the similar claim here: http://asbarez.com/61614/et-tu-obama-letter-from-a-former-admirer/
Perhaps ANCA in this particular case did not provide money. But my point still stands. The Armenian community as a whole should evaluate whether our scarce resources (time, energy AND money) should go towards symbolic support from American states or towards investments in Armenia.
Yes, Avery, clearly someone who advocates making investments in Armenia is not of Armenian descent.
^Correction: on the day in question (24 April 2010), there was a thunderstorm. Harut Sassounian was speaking therefore not from Times Square but from the Zohrab Center.
I wonder how many of these politicians also think Crimea and Eastern Ukraine are engaged in honest and genuine independence movements. Maybe one day they will also celebrate the “independence” of Crimea and Ukraine. Laughable.
The Russian army went beyond its borders and took over the territory of its neighboring country. Also Eastern Ukraine and Crimea already had self-determination within Ukraine, especially with its pro-Russian President.
In the case of Artsakh, by contrast, Artsakh did not have any semblance of self-determination within Azerbaijan. So it declared independence peacefully; Azerbaijan tried to fight it for this; andthe people of Artsakh fought off the Azeris. It was a domestic movement, not a foreign army blatantly coming in and seizing territory, as in the case of Crimea.
Why is it laughable for these politicians to celebrate the independence of Crimea? They have every right to celebrate its independence. And one day, these same politicians will also be celebrating the independence of Western Armenia from the Islamic terrorist state of Turkey.
Alex,
You are again attempting to twist around what you were saying earlier. What does the Armenian-American community’s financial support for President Obama during his 2008 presidential campaign, have to do with your earlier comment in which you stated, “how much money did ANCA have to spend on state legislators to get these votes to occur?” Once again, your point is wrong.
In your last comment, you again incorrectly referred to Artsakh as a separatist movement. Since the USSR no longer exists, how can Arstakh possibly be a separatist movement?
You glossed over what I wrote and did not watch or read the sources I provided.
My original point was a general one regarding whether the Diaspora should spend its resources to secure symbolic support from American states (with no foreign policy power) versus spending these resources directly in Armenia. Instead of addressing this fundamental point, you are fixating on ANCA’s role which I have already conceded may not be pertinent.
And for the third time, I will explain regarding Artsakh: it was a separatist (or independence–these terms are synonymous!) movement from the USSR. This is how Armenians must present it to the world, and this is how Armenians have presented it to the world (see, again, the video of President Kocharyan). Azerbaijan is trying to assert that Artsakh did not declare independence from the USSR but only from independent Azerbaijan. This is erroneous because Artsakh never was part of independent Azerbaijan.
I never thought that 1) advocating for greater investment in Armenia, and 2) presenting Armenia’s official position on Artsakh, would result in such backlash.
Alex,
Regardless of what you believe ‘separatist’ means, it is not appropriate to use to describe Artsakh. If the NKR is ‘separatist’ from the former USSR (as you put it) then so is Armenia and in fact, Russia. Thus it has little meaning and is inaccurate because the USSR does not exist anymore. The reason it is also not desirable to use is because Azerbaijan has spread sufficient propaganda to make everyone think of the NKR as being “separatist” from Azerbaijan, not the former USSR. And if we describe the people of Artsakh as being separatist, then we would be on the path of denying them their right to self-determination as well as acknowledging that Azerbaijan’s phony claims are valid, and they are not.
For its 70 year existence, the USSR was very damaging to Armenia and Armenians, while being a godsend for Azeris and Turks. The liberation of Artsakh is but one aspect of undoing that damage… and there is a long way to go.
Your sources have absolutely nothing to do with your original false comment from May 6th, in which you accused ANCA of bribery, by stating “how much money did ANCA have to spend on state legislators to get these votes to occur?”
Even on the subject of Artsakh, you’ve been twisting around your comments. If you carefully read your original comment from May 6th, you will notice that your description of Artsakh was extremely incorrect, by stating “why on earth would random states like Louisiana and Maine care about a far-away separatist movement?” Avery, actually informed you about your mistake before I did. But yet, you persistently try to twist it around. You first tried to correct yourself by saying “in reality, it is a separatist movement from the USSR; and then finally in your last comment, you got it right by saying “it was a separatist movement from the USSR.” Since Artsakh declared its independence before the termination of the USSR in December of 1991, it “was” therefore a separatist movement at that particular time, before the USSR’S breakup. However, since the USSR no longer exists, Artsakh is no longer a separatist movement.
In regard to the responses you’ve been getting on your above comments, they have nothing to do with advocating for greater investment in Armenia. They have to do with your original false statements about ANCA, and Artsakh.
On the subject of Crimea, it was indeed a domestic movement, as opposed to a “foreign army blatantly coming in and seizing territory.” As a result of its self-determination, Crimea broke away from Ukraine. Earlier this year on March 11th, the Supreme Council of Crimea, adopted a joint resolution expressing their intention to declare independence from Ukraine as a single united nation, with the possibility of joining the Russian Federation. In the March 16th referendum, nearly 96 percent of those who participated in the Crimean vote, supported the decision to join Russia. The following day, on March 17th, the Crimean parliament officially declared its independence from Ukraine and requested to join the Russian Federation. Under the principles of self-determination, the people of Crimea chose the path they wanted to go. Congratulations to them!
The referendum was technically flawed and done under the guise of Russian troops. Hardly a parallel we want to make with Artsakh.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-l-phillips/crimeas-technically-flawe_b_4992908.html
” if we describe the people of Artsakh as being separatist, then we would be on the path of denying them their right to self-determination”
This is faulty logic. Separatism is often the first step to self-determination. Describing “NKR” as separatist does not deny them the right of self-determination (assuming they deserve it), it merely acknowledges the hard fact: that it is an internationally recognized territory of Azerbaijan. If they behave (by treating our people respectfully, by being democratic, and by reducing corruption), they may deserve self-determination. If, on the other hand, they keep producing oligarchs and thugs who smother Armenia, and if they keep bullying Armenian civil-rights activists, then the Armenian people may gladly throw them back to their Azeri masters.
“On the subject of Crimea, it was indeed a domestic movement, as opposed to a “foreign army blatantly coming in and seizing territory.””
No, it was not. Only the those most susceptible to Putin’s propaganda believe so. As recognized by the international community, the “domestic” movement consisted of Russian soldiers acting under the orders of Russia. It was a blatant aggression by Russia, for which Russia is paying dearly and will continue to do so. Too bad that Armenia will pay the cost for its regime’s shortsighted decision to side with the aggressor.
Nope, it’s correct logic, so I suggest you think harder. Azerbaijan lost all credibility when it decided to engage in terrorist activities against its own citizens, not to mention starting a “war” against civilians, reminiscent of WWI genocidal Turkey. A terrorist government may be acceptable in the Turkic world, but it is illegitimate and unacceptable in the civilized one. Thus, the NKR cannot be separatist from Azerbaijan when the latter has lost its status as a legitimate country. And second, the NKR declared its freedom from the Soviet Union before its official breakup.
It’s quite amusing how the Turkbaijani poster from above, attempts to dictate to all of us, as to whether the Artsakh Republic deserves self-determination or not. The truth of the matter, is that the people of Artsakh have already determined what is in their best interest. They made that decision almost 23 years ago, when they declared their independence on September 2nd, 1991. And, despite being attacked by a much stronger military weapons-equipped Azerbaijan, the courageous and fearless Armenian freedom fighters of Artsakh still managed to repulse the attack, and ended up crushing the Azerbaijani military enormously. As a result, the people of Artsakh succeeded in liberating their land and gaining independence. And, for the past almost 23 years, Artsakh has continued to preserve its independence. Due to its commitment to true democratic principles, unlike the fake democratic principles of the Western power countries, the Artsakh Republic has greatly developed and improved itself since those extremely gloomy days, back in the 1990’s. Once again, although the Republic of Artsakh is not currently recognized internationally as an independent state, it has still continued to persevere and preserve its hard fought independence. It really doesn’t matter what the viewpoint of other countries happen to be in term’s of Artsakh’s status. What matters is how the people of Artsakh feel. And, if they classify themselves as being independent, then they are most definitely independent.
(1) “The referendum was technically flawed and done under the guise of Russian troops.” (2) “The domestic movement consisted of Russian soldiers acting under the orders of Russia. It was a blatant aggression by Russia.”
These comments by two of the above posters, represent the kind of false commentary that the U.S. and its allies are preaching in regard to Crimea and its decision to secede from Ukraine. It was quite obvious from the very start, that the U.S. and its allies would make up these kinds of false claims in order to try and make Russia look like a crooked bully. However, Crimea made its decision, and that decision consisted of breaking apart from Ukraine and joining the Russian Federation. And truthfully speaking, Russia and Crimea really don’t care about the negative opinions of the United States or its allies. Anyway, congratulations again to Crimea on its decision to secede from Ukraine under the principles of self-determination.
(1) “The referendum was technically flawed and done under the guise of Russian troops.”
Yes, and I presented a corroborating source that quotes independent observers on the ground. Care to present counter-sources other than your own opinion?
Your Huffington Post, is not the definition of a credible source. It’s just like all the other American newspapers, which are filled with false information. Did you actually think that the Huffington Post was going to print an article about Crimea, contrary to what the United States has been preaching on this particular subject, in which it persistently claims that the referendum was done under the Russian troops? Well, that’s certainly not what the people of Crimea are saying. They claim that the referendum was held by the Crimean parliament, in which 96 percent of them voted to secede from Ukraine and join the Russian Federation. I’ve actually been informed of this by quite a few people who happen to be from Crimea. Since the majority of Crimea’s population happens to be Russian, it does after all make sense that they would desire to secede from Ukraine and unite with Russia.
Alex,
Your Huffington Post article, actually, does not present any quotes from international observers to the Crimean referendum as you falsely stated in your previous comment. That particular article is just a repetition of the same exact thing that’s been written by so many American news sources in regard to the Crimean referendum. David Phillips, goes even farther than that, by inventing a story that “the referendum was conducted at gunpoint under the intimidating supervision of Russian troops.” Yeah right! Well, from the photos taken after the referendum results, the Crimean people sure didn’t appear to be frightened. On the contrary, they appeared to be quite joyful and even proceeded to celebrate the voting results.