New Diaspora Organization Deserves Your Support
Team Keghart Editorial,
2 January 2010
The announcement of the Protocols and their repercussions in the
Armenian Diaspora triggered the impetus among Armenians living outside
the motherland to re-evaluate their role and Armenia’s position
regarding Hay Tad. It is now widely believed that the leadership in
Armenia has abandoned Hay Tad and the struggle to pursue a just
resolution of Armenian land claims and the recovery of personal and
national property. In the ensuing national discourse it has become
almost irrelevant whether the negative perception is accurate.
Denigrating remarks towards the leadership of Armenia, and sometimes
outlandish accusations, fill the more `radical’, ultra-nationalist, or
maximalist websites. More sober individuals – those who disapprove of
certain portions of the Protocols, such as the sections dealing with
the infamous sub-commission and `International Treaties’, are trying
to gauge who is capable of accomplishing what. The latter is engaged
in defining the potential and limitations of the players on both sides
of the divide– Armenia and its Diaspora.
There is renewed interest to revive past efforts to crystallize
Diaspora as an international political factor, since Armenia– as a
sovereign state within definite geographic confines– is bound by
certain limitations and obligations. A multitude of NGOs, advocacy
groups and the three traditional political parties have been engaged,
for years, in activities to create such an impetus, but their efforts
have had relative success– Genocide recognition in more than 20
countries, but without assertions of claims.
After decades of tribulations, one would have expected that the
traditional Diaspora players would have come to a consensus with a
concrete plan of action that had a common denominator. Unfortunately,
that has not materialized for a variety of reasons which are beyond
the scope of this editorial. A self-created vacuum has led some to
consider a renewed, but not necessarily novel, effort to address the
crucial issue.
As in many other instances in our history, intellectuals have taken
the lead. In 2006 twenty-nine prominent scholars, historians,
businessmen and political figures, calling themselves `group of
initiators’, made a public appeal for the formation of an organization
that would represent the descendents of the Genocide. Anoushavan
Danielyan (former Prime Minister of Nagorno Karabagh, in personal
capacity), Vahakn Dadrian, Hayk Demoyan, Jean Varoujan Gureghian,
Silva Kaputikyan, Colonel Hayk Kotanjiyan (in personal capacity) ,
Karen Mikaelyan, Sos Sargsyan and Pertch Zeytuntsyan were amongst the
signatories. All are descendents of Genocide survivors.
Although the case they presented to arrive at certain conclusions are
sometimes questionable, by and large they depict an irrefutable
reality. The document states that Armenia `is not authorized by the
Western Armenian representative agencies to represent their rights and
is not able to take over the mission of the solution of specific
problems (bolded by Keghart) considering the destiny and future of
Western Armenia and the descendants of the Western Armenians.’ The
signing of the Protocols made it abundantly clear that this is the
case.
It is immaterial whether things could have been done differently, or
that they may change in a distant future. Similarly, opposing or
favoring certain positions will not make a dent to the overall
picture. At present, it’s clear that there are serious limitations to
what Armenia can and would do. Three successive administrations have
grappled unsuccessfully with the challenge – a challenge that has become
a national crisis.
Heeding the call of 2006, a temporary self-appointed `International
Organizing Committee’ has pursued the matter for the past three years.
It has attracted young professionals, legal and financial experts to
lay the ground for a representative organization in the Diaspora in
the form of an elected National Assembly with its National Council and
relevant committees. This new entity is proposed to be named Western
Armenian National Congress (WAN-Congress). The Congress plans to hold
a conference of representatives sometime before the end of the year.
To Keghart.com’s knowledge, all the traditional parties have been
informed, and representatives of the organizing committee have
travelled to various communities to recruit adherents and delegates to
the conference.
We are not so naïve as to think traditional organizations will welcome
this process with open arms, despite of what they may proclaim in
public. After all, the new kid on the block can be a potential
competitor. Perhaps we are living in an age of different
enlightenment: Individuals who sometimes espouse opposing views have
become participants in the same forums, discussing common concerns,
and even acting in concert on limited projects. We hope that
enlightened trend is contagious and may even engulf our political
parties. Is there a better common denominator – for all parties– than
Hay Tad?
Skeptics will question not only the manner that the proposed Congress
is shaping up but also the concept of establishing yet another
organization. For the time being, the skeptics may be the majority
because what they have seen so far is akin to poverty in the midst of
abundance. Figuratively speaking, it’s the equivalent of social
diabetes in Armenian reality.
Notwithstanding failed similar attempts, and considering the dismal
alternatives, Keghart.com welcomes this initiative but with some
reservations. These include interpretative and procedural matters that
we will discuss in an upcoming editorial. Meanwhile, readers are
invited to think seriously about this initiative and how they can
contribute by constructive criticism, by participating in the project
or by simply complimenting our intellectuals and experts who have
devoted – over the past three years– their time, energy and money to
this vital national cause.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
