The term “diaspora” is used so often in our communal discourse, one would think that it would have a very descriptive definition. The term comes from the Greek root meaning to “scatter about.” It has been traditionally applied to the Jewish people and their historic separation from their homeland for centuries. The term became applicable to the Armenians as a direct result of the Genocide, starting with the Hamidian atrocities and continuing through the Ittihad Ottomans. As a result, since the 1920s a growing majority of Armenians have resided outside of their homeland. Armenians continued to live in the eastern portion of their historic territory, but eventually millions made their homes in host countries who welcomed the Genocide survivors. In the early years of the post-World War I diaspora, there were hopes that the displaced generation would return to the “Hairenik.” With the exception of a late 1940s repatriation effort to Soviet Armenia, it remained only a dream.
What happened over the next decades has been nothing short of a miracle. Instead of remaining an underserved population and assimilating into their new countries, the Armenian diaspora maintained its values of education and a strong work ethic. In South America, the Middle East, Europe, the United States, Canada and as far away as Australia, Armenians thrived in all chosen professions, contributed to their adopted societies and built “new Armenias” where they lived. It is a remarkable story of growth and resilience. Even when economic and civil disorder caused secondary migrations, the Armenians were adaptable and survived. As the community gained strength, the unfinished business of justice for the Armenian Genocide (Hai Tahd) emerged as an additional responsibility accepted by the diaspora. This evolved into a professional and effective advocacy capability. Guided by the survivor generation, succeeding generations became the beneficiaries of western education, and countless stories of successful Armenians were common. The diaspora was a convenient term but was hardly a synonym for “integration” or “organization.” The diaspora began with individual efforts and grew as such. Even the tragic split in the Armenian church (and essentially the community) could not deter progress. In the 40s and 50s, the impact of assimilation had been minimal, and the division actually inspired some competition that spurred growth. Even as the signs of assimilation became evident in the 60s through the 80s, they were essentially neutralized by significant migration from the Middle East that would replenish diaspora communities.
When Armenia and Artsakh gained their independence in 1991, the diaspora was functioning as a large collection of semi-independent organizations and institutions. Affiliations were usually through legacy political connections. Those sympathizing with the Dashnagtsoutiun would usually go to Prelacy churches, the AYF, Homenetmen, ARS and Hamazkayin. Traditional links to Ramgavar or Hunchak backing would emerge as Diocese churches, ACYOA, AGBU or Tekeyan. Thankfully, the edges have softened over the years through dialogue and marriages. The Knights and Daughters of Vartan are good examples of diversity in national service. We have been blessed with excellent service-oriented infrastructure with generations of dedication. Yet in the interest of being candid, it is fair to state that we have fallen short in areas of collaboration. It is less impactful within our communities but is quite visible in our dealings with the homeland. We work with incredible dedication but as silos. There is some improvement, as the churches do much more together, and joint April 24 events are common. This trend will continue until all the walls are down, because the young generation has little commitment to legacy alignments. The bigger issue with our youth is keeping them interested in what the previous generation has gifted them.
If you observe the diaspora from Armenia and Artsakh’s perspective, you may gain valuable insight. It is to our benefit to view the challenges from that angle. The diaspora continues to operate with independent organizations, each carving out some niche in the homeland. The motivations are honorable, but the approach has significant limitations. In view of the recent tragedies we are experiencing as a nation, it is an opportune time to re-examine our approach.
Armenia’s modern independence year of 1991 and the diaspora remind me of an American western movie I watched recently. The government was opening up the Oklahoma territory to settlers in the 19th century. There was a simple approach. All the wagons, buggies and carts lined up and, when given the word, raced to locations to stake their claim. The diaspora continues to be an overly decentralized entity that is underutilized. Everyone is working for the betterment of the nation and will continue to make a difference. Yet I believe that our performance as a diaspora has begun to stagnate. Some people are disenchanted and tired. Others will bring innovation and energy. Despite the incredible dedication of all these groups, let’s ask a simple question: Has the diaspora with its significant wealth, incredible talent and nearly seven million people optimized its impact on the homeland? What I hear most say is absolutely not. Assuming there is some truth to that observation yet no organizational solution, then most will ignore the problem, believing that something is better than nothing. This is noble, but the problem remains. We can do better. It is particularly evident in the economic and national security domains where the diaspora can make a sizable impact. If we only look at the challenge from our perspective, then it is easy to criticize Armenia. We hear that we are not welcome, that they just want our money and that relations are stagnant. If we truly care about the future of the homeland, then we would not be dissuaded by any complication. What have we done to make the diaspora a more efficient and collaborative entity by organizing for success? When you live in a silo, you tend to be too focused on your own turf to be concerned about the greater whole. Talking about serving Armenia and not improving the effectiveness of the diaspora are not compatible thoughts.
The idea of improving the infrastructure of the diaspora can return significant results but is fraught with risk. Certainly this idea has been discussed for years, but given the current state of the homeland, our urgency to change should be foremost in our thinking. Most intra-communal challenges remain unresolved, not because a solution is not possible, but as a result of prevailing power motivations and egos. You can apply this logic to small problems at the parish council or local level as well as to larger organizational conflicts. Will and leadership are essential. Both usually emerge during times of crisis. Perhaps our time will come as groups such as the Future Armenian and others examine these dynamics and push for change. The idea of “organizing” the diaspora (at least the western diaspora) is usually met with resistance (or at least eternal debate) over who will lose power and how each silo will be impacted. This is where we need a bit of an attitude adjustment. Is it the organization or the mission that we are focused on? If it is the former, you will do good work and only appeal to the supportive target audience. If it is the mission, you will do great things and appeal to the greater nation. Many of us have been involved in our communities for many years, and this dilemma has always been visible. Instead of just producing zealots for an organization, how about teaching passion for the mission? This will reduce inter-organizational conflict and enable new structures to emerge. When a corporation that serves a particular market begins to stagnate, it considers restructuring to enable new growth in its market. Our market is the global Armenian nation. Our mission is the prosperity and security of that nation. Everything else is merely a vehicle.
Talking about serving Armenia and not improving the effectiveness of the diaspora are not compatible thoughts.
A pan-Armenian integration designed to optimize the diaspora support of the homeland should have several components that must be debated (but not for too long). Are members representing organizations or individuals? Are there individual advisors? Is it a representative body like the House of Representatives where larger groups have more seats, or is it an equal representation group like the U.S. Senate? One of the more interesting aspects of this effort would entail determining how to gain the respect and trust of Armenia. One idea I heard recently from a friend in California would be to require that members be dual citizens with Armenia. This would address the issue of “outsiders” participating in Armenia’s affairs and bridge the credibility gap. Another concept is that the plenary body be broken into several standing committees on topics such as defense/national security, education, infrastructure, economy, social programs and intelligence. These resources would build relations with the appropriate ministries in Armenia to define areas of support. This should not limit the work of any diaspora organization in Armenia. It is intended to take a more deliberate approach going forward to improve the overall effectiveness of the diaspora. The other observation we should internalize is that this will be a “messy” process. Collaborating can start modestly and grow as trust in the process occurs. It will take strong and visionary leadership from some of the larger stakeholders, such as the hierarchical Sees of the church, ARF, AGBU and others, to lead for a brighter future.
I would encourage all to embrace the concept of a more integrated diaspora before arguing the specifics. The purely decentralized independent model that has fueled the growth of the diaspora can no longer energize the underutilized potential for the homeland. As with any vision for the greater benefit, we must be ready to compromise in order to reach new heights. What must be foremost in our minds is the benefit of a more organized and effective global model to protect our national interests. It is tragic to witness the needs of the homeland and the untapped potential of the diaspora. It is time to move forward with a global vision that brings the full capacity of the Armenian nation into reality. It will energize the diaspora while bringing security and prosperity to the homeland. Sustaining the identity of the diaspora lies in the homeland. The mutual benefits are a natural state.
Stepan Piligian
Latest posts by Stepan Piligian (see all)
- What is our message on April 24, 2024? - April 24, 2024
- The joy of experiencing humble leadership - April 18, 2024
- The elephant in the room…The tragic disrespect of Israel towards Armenians - April 10, 2024
I agree with you 100%. I would add that the pan Armenian organization should have a budget of one billion dollars/year. The reasons for this are as follows a) Armenians must start to think BIG, how to make a significant impact in their communities and in Armenia. Too often Armenians are satisfied with small accomplishments( “we did everything we could”); b) force Armenians to work together towards significant goals and set aside pettiness; c)non armenian organizations and politicians start to take Armenians seriously, instead of paying lip service ; d) build infrastructure in Armenia ( defense, technology universities, improve roads to decrease car accident deaths ), e) stop begging the world to save starving Armenians. We are մուրացկան again 108 years after the genocide.
Stepan Piigian Only now You are advocating new Diaspora strategies committed to defend and protect Armenia/Artsakh (fundamental rights) against the perverse and uncontrolled aggression (underground with the OK of Poutine and his clan ). Sorry but you’re far behind. Ever since Armenia – RDA – full-fledged member of UN and the international community I have been trying to convince all Diasporans to become active political actors- STop frating Azerbaijan and Turkey – but get involved on the world political agendas. Via an accredited. whistle blowing and alert raisin NGO at all international and related forums. Create counter-media to counteract the imposed mutism of world media/press. The only actor being ANCA. Millions Armenians manifesting at UN Hdq until the fake and the lies and denials of Armenia’s opposing neighbor’s become political realities and not virtual scenes of renewed “ethnic cleansing”. Diasporaawareness level is still lamentably dormant, retrograde
unable to unite and act – Read my articles Aline Dedeyan – in French as well. And instead of constant analysis and infos actions geared to stop the unconditional breach of all Legitimate rights of Armenian people. –
Diaspora organozations and activists, with their ties to Western financed NGOs and the State Department, have done enough damage to Armenia. The Diaspora was instrumental in bringing a Color Revolution to Armenia. Those who talked against Serj Sargsyan, Robert Kocharyan and/or Putin and Russia during the past 30 years, are those that directly contributed to the historic mess Armenia is in today. Congtatulations. You got what you wished for in 2018. You then got what you deserved in 2020.
This is an example of rhetoric that we don’t need. Yes, Armenians do make mistakes but to say “You then got what you deserved in 2020” is painful to thousands of Armenian families who lost loved ones in 2020. You have a right to make a case against the color revolution of 2018 but please don’t paint the Russian alliance as a marriage made in heaven. It was and is a very painful marriage especially when the Russian partner(so called strategic ally) decides to lean towards Azerbaijan /Turkey at the expense of Armenia. This process started before 2018. Today the 2000 Russian “peacekeepers” in Artsakh have turned into “prison guards” and using 120,000 Armenians as hostages to force Russian “friendly alliance” down Armenia’s throat. Please explain why Armenia should be allies with a decrepit, murderous and dysfunctional country which is going backward, except that the alternative with Turkey/Azerbaijan may be worst. If that is your argument, then please state it clearly.
The Russian 102nd Military Base is a Russian military bae in Gyumri. HayPost (Armenian: Հայփոստ), the official national postal service of Armenia that was founded in 1991, which is one of the largest employers in Armenia, is owned by a Russian company. Armenia continues to buy gas from Russia at fair market value. Armenia, along with Belarus and few other countries has a security pact with Russia as a member of CSTO. Russia and Armenia have a free trade and no passport required visitation and many Russians have set their businesses in Armenia and many Armenian nationals work in Russia, many seasonally.
I cite these as examples of the policy outlined by Nikol Pachinyan in his address to the Armenian Assembly (AA) on May 1, 2018 when he declared: “We consider Russia as a strategic partner and this movement (note: velvet revolution) does not present any danger to the Russian Federation.” Subsequently on May 1, 2018, NP got only 48 votes when 53 votes constituted the majority of the 106 member AA, but got 58 votes in the second round and was nominated as the PM, as simple majority is stipulated for nomination. In both instances the ARF block of 7 members voted for him.
Please elaborate, why do you think Armenia is not pursuing a strategic relationship with Russia as countries do?
Dear Mardiro,
I see you are not all that well acquainted with the political climate and landscape in Armenia. Allow me to shed some light on this topic.
His entire life, Nikol dreamed of abandoning Artsakh, getting rid of the “Karabakh Clan” from Armenia, forgetting the Armenian Genocide, unconditionally opening Armenia’s borders with Azerbaijan and Turkey and, last but not least, bringing Armenia out of Russia’s orbit. Nikol never hid his political sentiments. In fact, he even wrote about all this when he was a pseudo-journalist, of course financed by Western sources.
Naturally, these unique characteristics exhibited by Nikol did not escape the attention of various intelligence services around the world. This essentially is how and why Western and Turkish interests helped place Nikol into power in 2018. This is NOT speculation. This can actually be proven in a court of law. Follow the money trail, as they say. The financing that paid for various sociopolitical programs that ultimately paved the way to Nikol’s “New Armenia” (e.g. Open Society, NED, USAID, British Council, European Council, AGBU, AUA, large numbers of Western financed NGOs, large numbers of Western financed propaganda outlets posing as news agencies, money transfers from Baku to Armenia just prior to Nikol’s “revolution”, etc) and you will end up in Washington, London, Brussels, Ankara, Baku, and perhaps Tel Aviv. To it’s utter shame and disgrace, the Armenian world, both native and Diasporan, preferred to keep Nikol and his gang of Western financed activists in power not once but twice, the second time being after the embarrassing defeat Armenia suffered in 2020.
So, faced with Armenian-style political instability and duplicity, and having much bigger matters to tend to in Ukraine, 2018 was also when Russia, which had been Armenia’s only lifeline since the 1990s, began pulling its protective hand away from both Armenia and Artsakh, but did so only slightly. Slightly, so that Armenia and Artsakh wouldn’t disappear completely from the world map. This is because Moscow still needs an Armenia in the region as a buffer against Turkic and Islamic expansion.
Said otherwise, we got what we wanted in 2018 (Western style democracy), we then got what we deserved in 2020 (a historic defeat). Armenian mothers that were angrily lamenting the deaths of their sons in Artsakh, are now lamenting their sons’ deaths in Armenia. You reap what you sow.
Seeing that the Armenian world was desperately seeking to embrace Western powers to off-set Russia’s perceived over-influence in Armenia, protecting Armenian interests in Artsakh, as Moscow had done since 1992 at the expense of alienating Turks and Azeris, no longer served Russia’s strategic interests. Seeing that Armenians were persistently seeking Western integration, Moscow began cooperating with Ankara and Baku, ultimately because it needed to pacify its southern flank on the eve of its historic conflagration against Ukraine and NATO. It worked. Both Ankara and Baku have not taken sides against Russia in the war in Ukraine. As such, as a major world crisis was approaching the region, instead of moving closer to the Russian Federation, if only for security reasons (similar to what Belarus, Crimea and Abkhazia had done), which would have been the logical/natural move as Armenia was and continues to be almost entirely dependent on Russia for survival, by 2018, the Armenian world had effectively maneuvered Armenia into geopolitical isolation and a dead-end. Armenia found out that when you try to please both sides of a geopolitical divide, neither side is please with you.
Just like how Moscow punished Baku in 1992, Tbilisi in 2008 and Kiev from 2014-present for putting into power Western financed activists, Moscow also punished Yerevan in 2020 for the 2018 Color Revolution in Armenia. But, unlike what the Kremlin will do to Ukraine (i.e. Ukraine will cease to exist when this war ends), the Kremlin will make sure that an Armenia and an Artsakh survives in some form because as noted above, Russians still need Armenians in the south Caucasus as a geostrategic buffer against Turkic peiples and Muslims.
Said otherwise, we Armenians had a chance to be like a Belarus, Abkhazia or a Crimea (i.e. safe and secure at a time of global crisis), we instead chose to be like a Kurdistan instead (i.e. used, abused, beaten and abandoned).
In a nutshell, what I described above is how Armenians lost Artsakh. What I described is also why Armenia today is like a rudderless boat on a stormy sea with an utterly incompetent/suicidal captain at the helm. All in all, the last 5 years in Armenia has been a nightmare, and a toxic by-product of Western-style democracy, Armenian-style political illiteracy and the self-destructive efforts of Armenians worldwide to use the West as a leverage against Russia.
Some parting wisdom: people deserve the governments they have, political illiteracy has a high cost, there are no free meals in politics, you reap what you sow, revolutions end up eating their children, those who don’t learn from their past mistakes are doomed to repeat them, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, karma is a you know what. Consequently, Armenians today have no right to complain, as they were again the main authors of the country’s latest tragedy. Therefore, sit back nown and enjoy your “Westernization” and “Democracy”…
“Said otherwise, we Armenians had a chance to be like a Belarus, Abkhazia or a Crimea (i.e. safe and secure at a time of global crisis), we instead chose to be like a Kurdistan instead (i.e. used, abused, beaten and abandoned).”
I am glad that you explicitly say what your vision is for Armenia – a third rate backwater under the decrepit Russian umbrella. I always thought that Armenians could do better ( think Baltic States, Finland, Singapore), but maybe as you say , you know the region and Armenians better than I do. I believe that it is a false choice between survival under the Russian umbrella and being wiped out by the Turks. A third way is for the Armenian nation to come together and build the economy and defenses so that the millions of Armenians who live outside will migrate back to live a prosperous life in Armenia. I think that its possible to do that if the Armenians have a plan and organized to execute it on a national and international scale.
PS: as some of us keep saying, it’s too late to do anything now. Major geopolitical shifts have begun across the world, but we Armenians maneuvered Armenia right out of contention and straight into a dead end. We are currently not in any position to control or to even influence events. Even joining the Russian Federation is no longer an option today because Moscow is fully concentrated on its existential war against the West in Ukraine. Therefore, what will happen, will happen. And whatever happens, it will be our collective fault. If any of you has at any time spoken against Serj Sargsyan, Robert Kocharyan or Russia, you have contributed to what Armenia and Artsakh are going through today. Like I said, you got what you wanted in 2018 – a Western financed “democratic” revolution. You then got what you deserved in 2020 – a historic defeat.
Russia is an enemy. Has always been a enemy. Hopefully Armenians worldwide will understand that and vote for a competent diasporian as a PM or foreign minister.
If the GDP of Armenia was $50 or $100 Billion( approaching the per capita GDP of Finland and Singapore) instead of the current $ 20 Bn, then Armenians would not need a “benign” Russia to employ them in Russia nor own their Postoffice nor energy sources. You sound as if Russia is doing Armenia a favor. This is very costly to Armenia and ultimately it develops “servile “ attitude that Armenians can’t take care of themselves. That was the mentality in Ottoman times after 600 years of occupation and it was not healthy. I am for strategic relationships with Russia and any country that will work for Armenia’s benefit. But I am also critical of fellow Armenians in Armenia and especially in the Diaspora for possible missed opportunities as described in Mr. Piligian’s article.
Mardiros, I did not intend to sound that Russia is doing Armenia a favor. There are no favors in such matters. But whatever Armenia’s GDP is, I imagine Armenia has Russia in mind and its relations with other countries are carefully crafted not to antagonize the Northern Bear.