ON CHARITY
Azat Artsakh – Nagorno Karabakh Republic [NKR]
29 April 05
Charity began to develop rapidly in the second half of the 19th
century. The vivid example to this is the history of the town of
Shushi where the tracesof charity, despite the endless efforts of
`erasing’ the Armenian traces from the history of Shushi, are
astounding in scope. The town hospital of Zhamharian family, the real
school built by Gregory Arakelov, the town water supply system built
by Tadevos Tamirian at the end of the 19th century on which hespent
all his possessions at the end of his lifeâ=80¦ The simple enumeration
of what was done by Armenian benefactors in Shushi may take a great
many pages. In other words, charity in the Armenian society has good
and old traditions. It is interesting to know whether charity in the
present-day Armenian society is on the same level as it used to be,
and whether the traditions are kept by the â=80=9Cnew’ Armenians. It
is interesting to know how often the rich class of our society helps
the poor and takes part in charity undertakings. It is interesting to
know if the businessmen have their unwritten rules to provide certain
meansfor charity aims. It is interesting to know whether more charity
means are provided to state charity programmes or programmes
implemented by public organizations. On the basis of this data we try
to find out the level of charity in our society and make the list of
the most generous benefactors in Karabakh. The survey was conducted in
15 organizations in Stepanakert. Donations go to the social sector
mainly: aid to families of killed soldiers, the disabled and the
poor. This is directly related to the social and economic state of the
country and the consequences of the war, especially that the majority
of the business owners in Karabakh have participated and witnessed the
war. The wish to help those in difficulty is explained by emotions
mainly and the thought that the relatives of the benefactor could be
in their place. The second place is held by those who give out food,
fuel, clothes immediately to those who ask them for help. It is
notable that all the businessmen admit that food or clothes
distributed to people does not solve the problem. This reminds alcohol
or drug addiction in which the emotive factor has a decisive
role. Funding culturalprogrammes is in the third place. Education is
in the last place. Science, health, ecology and culture (do not
confuse with pop culture) have completely been left out of the
attention of the Karabakh businessmen, which also can be explained.
These spheres do not tolerate single-time actions of charity; they
require constant attention. It is impossible to operate these spheres
without clearly worked out programmes. It is notable that business
owners do not know with whom they can cooperate in these spheres. The
fact of unawareness of the activity of public organizations in
Karabakh is obvious. `Are there public organizations in Karabakh which
can cooperate and propose serious programs?’ Such a viewpoint prevails
among the business owners in Karabakh. The passive attitude of
non-commercial organizations in the current difficult social and
economic conditions is not understandable. Perhaps, it is the
stereotype that money comes from abroad only that prevents efficiency.
Their innumerable and practically abortive efforts to find sponsors
abroad do not let them notice potential sponsors living beside
them. One thing is certain: there is no coordination of activity
between the commercial and non-commercial organizations. The
impression is that these two exist on different planets and do not
know anything about each other. The problems of the non-commercial
sectors have been raised in our newspaper for many times, and it is
pointless to discuss them once again. The state or ganizations which
attend to science, education, culture, health mainly sponsor cultural
events. There have been no more serious proposals on their part so
far. The businessmen do not imagine what they are supposed to do
either. There is no planning of long-term charity programmes. `We help
those who turn to us for help,’ this is the main principle of charity
with almost all the businessmen in Karabakh. There is no pressure on
the part of the state organizations in terms of `obligatory-voluntary
charity’. However, funding of programmes worked out by state
organizations considerably exceeds that of the programmes of public
organizations. Thus, there is no clear-cut state policy on charity and
benefactors. As one of the businessmen put it, `We pay from our pocket
and it is all the same to the government if we do it or not’ It should
be noted that practically all of them pointed out the passive attitude
of the government towards charity and tax payment. However, they wish
to provide means for charity in the future too, notwithstanding the
attitude of the authorities. Fortunately, for the majority of the
businessmen of Karabakh charity is nota burden. They are motivated by
patriotism and the wish to be of use to the society in which they
live. Unfortunately, we did not manage to make the list of the most
generous businessmen of Karabakh. Most of them prefer not to have
their names published. Some of them did not want to answer our
questions. Therefore, starting from ethics, we decided not to write
their names at all. However, we would like to mention the name of one
of them. The majority of the citizens who took part in the survey
regard the president of the company `Petrol Service’ Edward Verdian as
the most generous benefactor in Karabakh. He is one of the few who
plan their activity, and unfortunately, as far as we know, he is the
only local businessman who attends to educational programmes. He says
he dreams of implementing long-term programmes in this sphere. Only in
1994 – 2000 he provided about 500 thousand US dollars for charity
aims. However, this sum could be much larger if the government
implemented a more far-reaching program in the sphere of charity.
Thus, business solves the social problems superficially.No one teaches
social policy to the businessmen. As a result the sums of money
donated by them for charity are not controlled and do not solve social
problems. In conclusion we may say that by encouraging charity the
government can solve a great many problems. First of all, charity
results in increasing activityof the non-commercial sector, which the
government needs in order to a) economize financial means, for
charities usually do the same thing more cheaply than the governmental
organizations; b) be better informed; c) be able to make experiments
by trusting difficult plans to non-commercial organizations, d)reduce
its responsibilities of problems of the society. Second, the
development of the non-commercial sector results in growing civil
activity of the population and foundation and development of civil
institutions eliminating the threatof returning to the totalitarian
past. Third, a developed non-commercial sector partly solves the
problem of employment which is the main bugbear of any developing
country. Four, a developed non-commercial sector encourages
businessmen to make more donations for charity by presenting more
interesting, urgent, and what is more important, literate and
long-term programs to them. And of course, a literate state policy in
the sphere of charity. It is necessary to encourage charity through
tax legislation, enabling solution of a great many problems not on the
expense of the government. All this will finally result in easing
social tensions existing even in the most developed societies, and
will enable solving a great many problems which the government cannot
or does not want to deal with.
AA.
29-04-2005
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress