Tweet
WHAT "HAYASTAN" ALL-ARMENIAN FUND DOES NOT WANT YOU TO KNOW
By Ara K. Manoogian
http://www.thetruthmustbetold.com/2011/11/18/haaf-summary/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=haaf-summary
November 18, 2011
It has been a year since Sarkis Kotanjian, Executive Director of
"Hayastan" All-Armenian Fund (HAAF) Western U.S. region, gave aTV
interview, during which he made so many untrue statements about the
Fund that I could no longer put up with the lies. I started working
on a detailed report about the true face of the Fund, based on both
my personal experience and ample evidence from eyewitness accounts and
press. The white paper was titled "To Donate Or Not to Donate?"(Click
here for the Armenian version), which covered a wide range of issues
related to the HAAF and the Armenian government.
I had a meeting with Sarkis Kotanjian shortly after the interview
to understand why he was drawing such an inaccurate picture of the
Fund on TV. It became obvious that he was misleading thousands of
viewers knowingly.
The ultimate goal of the white paper was to raise awareness among
the Armenian donors about the reality behind the veil of deceptive
propaganda and to present viable solutions for those ills, which plague
the fund. The research was also intended to spread the word about the
negative impact of charitable activities on the overall development
of Armenia and Artsakh, based on various international studies.
The first part of the white paper was published at The Truth Must Be
Told, about a month after Kotanjian's infamous interview, on December
17, 2010. The first professional Armenian news outlet to pick up the
report was Hraparak Daily, based in Yerevan, after the release of Part
II in January 5, 2011. Hraparak Daily reprinted both parts on the same
day, January 6, 2011. And this republication marked the beginning of
a long journey of the white paper on HAAF through Armenia, Artsakh,
and the Diaspora.
When an enthusiastic young man voluntarily translated the report
into French and posted it piece by piece on the forum of Nouvelles
d'Armenie, the thread immediately became the hottest topic in the
forum. The forum users were discussing every aspect of the report.
They eventually demanded that Bedros Terzian, President of the Fund in
France, respond to all the arguments made in the white paper. Instead,
Bedros Terzian ordered the editorship of the French-Armenian journal
to delete the entire thread. Unfortunately for him, I had been able
to save it and repost it at my media blog. Terzian then published
an article, "Pour le Fonds Armenien, par Bedros Terzian," denying
all the facts and allegations in the white paper with emotional
patriotic statements.
While Nouvelles d'Armenie gave in to the pressure of the HAAF and
limited the lively debate on the activities of the Fund, another
France-based Armenian newspaper, Nor Haratch, sided with objective
journalism. This Armenian language newspaper covered the report in
four consecutive issues in March of 2011. Betros Terzian attacked
this newspaper for disseminating the content of the white paper, by
publishing "CORRECTION: About "Hayastan" All-Armenian Fund" in the
same newspaper. Nor Haratch responded to the libelous attack with
"Armenian Journalism Targeted: Response to 'Correction'." And I
responded with "Bedros Terzian Saw the Elephant."
Soon the growing noise around the HAAF became too loud for the
executive leadership of the HAAF to continue keeping silent. It was
the publication of Part III that broke the silence of Ara Vardanyan,
Executive Director of the HAAF in Armenia. He left a comment under
Part III, denying every single point made in the entire report. The
Armenian and English versions of Part III, combined, generated a
heated discussion in the form of about ninety comments.
The only person to take Vardanyan's side in the discussions was a
mysterious user, who chose to present himself with the nom-de-plume
Pahakazor. He presented himself as an average Diaspora Armenian who is
a staunch supporter of the Fund and all of its projects. 'Pahakazor'
also spoke with admiration about Sarkis Kotanjian, whose interview was
the target in the first two parts of the report. It later turned out
that 'Pahakazor' was none other than Sarkis Kotanjan himself. Based
on irrefutable evidence that I was able to collect, I published an
article "'Hayastan' All-Armenian Fund Cover-Up Foiled," which debunks
Sarkis Kotanjian and his dishonorable strategy in an effort to save his
and the Fund's face and smear mine: Thus, assuming a fake identity,
Sarkis Kotanjian was praising and promoting the Fund by giving false
testimony. By claiming to be a diligent donor, who has checked and
is now completely satisfied with the way his money translates into
projects, Sarkis Kotanjian misleads people into trusting and donating
to an organization he works for.
On March 2, 2011, Ara Vardanyan made the following statement in a
comment to Part III of the white paper: "Both I and Sarkis Kotanjian
are ready at any time to sit with you on one of the Armenian
Televisions and talk about all these things live. Lets see what is
true and what is not" (sic). I accepted the challenge and sent a
press release, "Ara Vardanyan, "Hayastan" All-Armenian Fund Executive
Director, To Debate Fund Activities Live on TV" to all major Armenian
news outlets announcing the upcoming live TV debate.
I sent both Ara Vardanyan and Sarkis Kotanjian a private email,
on July 15, 2011, suggesting that we decide the date of the live TV
debate any day between August and October. However, I received no
response from either of them. After the leaders of the Fund broke
their promise and dropped the ball on me, I had to publish an article
regarding their irresponsibility, "To Debate Or Not to Debate About
"Hayastan" All-Armenian Fund?"
A couple of weeks following the publication of this article, I emailed
Ara Aghishian, President and Chairman of the Board of "Hayastan"
All-Armenian Fund's U.S. Western Region affiliate, asking for a
meeting. I received a call from his secretary two months later, on
October 11, 2011, acknowledging that my email had been received and
that Aghishian was going to contact me. He has not until now.
Nevertheless, before and after my attempt to meet with Ara Aghishian,
I have been able to meet with a few members of the Board of Trustees
of the Fund's U.S. Western region affiliate. But it has turned out
that they were not as actively involved in the life of the Fund as
one would expect a board member should be. They were uninformed about
the issues that I presented, quoting the white paper.
The Fund has not only declined to face the criticism but has continued
taking irresponsible steps. The latest major blunder is their new
project, the launch of which was announced in the summer of 2011:
the renovation of the retirement home in Stepanakert. I conducted
research regarding the project, and the evidence I was able to collect
indicated the redundancy of this initiative. The most obvious deception
was in the Fund's statement that the building had not undergone
major renovation since 1988, whereas I established the fact that
the retirement complex was renovated in 1999 with the sponsorship of
Louise Manoogian Simone. This and other glaring inconsistencies are
presented in a report, "How to Renovate Already Renovated Retirement
Home," which I completed in October 2011.
It is now obvious that Ara Vardanyan had offered the bold challenge
of the live TV debate with the expectation of scaring me. But this
was a grave miscalculation. My decision to take up the gauntlet
forced the Fund to back up and rehabilitate its initial strategy of
silencing the criticism by ignoring it. This explains why the executive
leaders of the Fund did not react to the release of the final part
of the white paper on June 21, 2011, despite the presence therein of
serious accusations, such as the evidence of the Fund having abused
its tax-exempt status for the benefit of the oligarchs, who dominate
the Armenian economy.
Throughout the entire year, I have tried to raise awareness about
the problems associated with the Fund's activities and its role in
Armenia's development. I have also tried to generate public debate
about the pros and cons of charity for Armenia today. I am deeply
concerned with the consequences of humanitarian aid, which has been
promoting dependency among the Armenian population on charitable
handouts and laziness of the government to carry out its duties.
Though the white paper built a sizable audience in the Armenian
Diaspora and stirred debate in the U.S. and across the Atlantic,
it is sad that the Fund preferred a policy of denialism over dialogue.
Today on the threshold of the consecutive phonethons and telethons
taking place in different communities of the Diaspora, it is important
for the Armenian donor to think twice before making a decision to
donate. Remember, not all that glitters is gold. It is important
to differentiate between short-sighted benevolence and long-term
sustainability. We should look a few steps ahead and understand the
need to amend the agenda. The leadership of "Hayastan" All-Armenian
Fund is infested with the authorities who have failed the Armenian
people in so many ways that the only support they need is a helping
hand to get rid of their yoke. Diaspora needs to form a new generation
of organizations that demand government accountability, rather than
fix and cover up a few of the countless consequences of government
corruption.
Ara K. Manoogian is a human rights activist representing the
Shahan Natalie Family Foundation in Artsakh and Armenia; a Fellow
of the Washington-based Policy Forum Armenia (PFA); creator
ofwww.thetruthmustbetold.com and author of the white paper "To
Donate Or Not To Donate", an in depth study on the activities of the
"Hayastan" All-Armenia Fund.
From: Baghdasarian
By Ara K. Manoogian
http://www.thetruthmustbetold.com/2011/11/18/haaf-summary/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=haaf-summary
November 18, 2011
It has been a year since Sarkis Kotanjian, Executive Director of
"Hayastan" All-Armenian Fund (HAAF) Western U.S. region, gave aTV
interview, during which he made so many untrue statements about the
Fund that I could no longer put up with the lies. I started working
on a detailed report about the true face of the Fund, based on both
my personal experience and ample evidence from eyewitness accounts and
press. The white paper was titled "To Donate Or Not to Donate?"(Click
here for the Armenian version), which covered a wide range of issues
related to the HAAF and the Armenian government.
I had a meeting with Sarkis Kotanjian shortly after the interview
to understand why he was drawing such an inaccurate picture of the
Fund on TV. It became obvious that he was misleading thousands of
viewers knowingly.
The ultimate goal of the white paper was to raise awareness among
the Armenian donors about the reality behind the veil of deceptive
propaganda and to present viable solutions for those ills, which plague
the fund. The research was also intended to spread the word about the
negative impact of charitable activities on the overall development
of Armenia and Artsakh, based on various international studies.
The first part of the white paper was published at The Truth Must Be
Told, about a month after Kotanjian's infamous interview, on December
17, 2010. The first professional Armenian news outlet to pick up the
report was Hraparak Daily, based in Yerevan, after the release of Part
II in January 5, 2011. Hraparak Daily reprinted both parts on the same
day, January 6, 2011. And this republication marked the beginning of
a long journey of the white paper on HAAF through Armenia, Artsakh,
and the Diaspora.
When an enthusiastic young man voluntarily translated the report
into French and posted it piece by piece on the forum of Nouvelles
d'Armenie, the thread immediately became the hottest topic in the
forum. The forum users were discussing every aspect of the report.
They eventually demanded that Bedros Terzian, President of the Fund in
France, respond to all the arguments made in the white paper. Instead,
Bedros Terzian ordered the editorship of the French-Armenian journal
to delete the entire thread. Unfortunately for him, I had been able
to save it and repost it at my media blog. Terzian then published
an article, "Pour le Fonds Armenien, par Bedros Terzian," denying
all the facts and allegations in the white paper with emotional
patriotic statements.
While Nouvelles d'Armenie gave in to the pressure of the HAAF and
limited the lively debate on the activities of the Fund, another
France-based Armenian newspaper, Nor Haratch, sided with objective
journalism. This Armenian language newspaper covered the report in
four consecutive issues in March of 2011. Betros Terzian attacked
this newspaper for disseminating the content of the white paper, by
publishing "CORRECTION: About "Hayastan" All-Armenian Fund" in the
same newspaper. Nor Haratch responded to the libelous attack with
"Armenian Journalism Targeted: Response to 'Correction'." And I
responded with "Bedros Terzian Saw the Elephant."
Soon the growing noise around the HAAF became too loud for the
executive leadership of the HAAF to continue keeping silent. It was
the publication of Part III that broke the silence of Ara Vardanyan,
Executive Director of the HAAF in Armenia. He left a comment under
Part III, denying every single point made in the entire report. The
Armenian and English versions of Part III, combined, generated a
heated discussion in the form of about ninety comments.
The only person to take Vardanyan's side in the discussions was a
mysterious user, who chose to present himself with the nom-de-plume
Pahakazor. He presented himself as an average Diaspora Armenian who is
a staunch supporter of the Fund and all of its projects. 'Pahakazor'
also spoke with admiration about Sarkis Kotanjian, whose interview was
the target in the first two parts of the report. It later turned out
that 'Pahakazor' was none other than Sarkis Kotanjan himself. Based
on irrefutable evidence that I was able to collect, I published an
article "'Hayastan' All-Armenian Fund Cover-Up Foiled," which debunks
Sarkis Kotanjian and his dishonorable strategy in an effort to save his
and the Fund's face and smear mine: Thus, assuming a fake identity,
Sarkis Kotanjian was praising and promoting the Fund by giving false
testimony. By claiming to be a diligent donor, who has checked and
is now completely satisfied with the way his money translates into
projects, Sarkis Kotanjian misleads people into trusting and donating
to an organization he works for.
On March 2, 2011, Ara Vardanyan made the following statement in a
comment to Part III of the white paper: "Both I and Sarkis Kotanjian
are ready at any time to sit with you on one of the Armenian
Televisions and talk about all these things live. Lets see what is
true and what is not" (sic). I accepted the challenge and sent a
press release, "Ara Vardanyan, "Hayastan" All-Armenian Fund Executive
Director, To Debate Fund Activities Live on TV" to all major Armenian
news outlets announcing the upcoming live TV debate.
I sent both Ara Vardanyan and Sarkis Kotanjian a private email,
on July 15, 2011, suggesting that we decide the date of the live TV
debate any day between August and October. However, I received no
response from either of them. After the leaders of the Fund broke
their promise and dropped the ball on me, I had to publish an article
regarding their irresponsibility, "To Debate Or Not to Debate About
"Hayastan" All-Armenian Fund?"
A couple of weeks following the publication of this article, I emailed
Ara Aghishian, President and Chairman of the Board of "Hayastan"
All-Armenian Fund's U.S. Western Region affiliate, asking for a
meeting. I received a call from his secretary two months later, on
October 11, 2011, acknowledging that my email had been received and
that Aghishian was going to contact me. He has not until now.
Nevertheless, before and after my attempt to meet with Ara Aghishian,
I have been able to meet with a few members of the Board of Trustees
of the Fund's U.S. Western region affiliate. But it has turned out
that they were not as actively involved in the life of the Fund as
one would expect a board member should be. They were uninformed about
the issues that I presented, quoting the white paper.
The Fund has not only declined to face the criticism but has continued
taking irresponsible steps. The latest major blunder is their new
project, the launch of which was announced in the summer of 2011:
the renovation of the retirement home in Stepanakert. I conducted
research regarding the project, and the evidence I was able to collect
indicated the redundancy of this initiative. The most obvious deception
was in the Fund's statement that the building had not undergone
major renovation since 1988, whereas I established the fact that
the retirement complex was renovated in 1999 with the sponsorship of
Louise Manoogian Simone. This and other glaring inconsistencies are
presented in a report, "How to Renovate Already Renovated Retirement
Home," which I completed in October 2011.
It is now obvious that Ara Vardanyan had offered the bold challenge
of the live TV debate with the expectation of scaring me. But this
was a grave miscalculation. My decision to take up the gauntlet
forced the Fund to back up and rehabilitate its initial strategy of
silencing the criticism by ignoring it. This explains why the executive
leaders of the Fund did not react to the release of the final part
of the white paper on June 21, 2011, despite the presence therein of
serious accusations, such as the evidence of the Fund having abused
its tax-exempt status for the benefit of the oligarchs, who dominate
the Armenian economy.
Throughout the entire year, I have tried to raise awareness about
the problems associated with the Fund's activities and its role in
Armenia's development. I have also tried to generate public debate
about the pros and cons of charity for Armenia today. I am deeply
concerned with the consequences of humanitarian aid, which has been
promoting dependency among the Armenian population on charitable
handouts and laziness of the government to carry out its duties.
Though the white paper built a sizable audience in the Armenian
Diaspora and stirred debate in the U.S. and across the Atlantic,
it is sad that the Fund preferred a policy of denialism over dialogue.
Today on the threshold of the consecutive phonethons and telethons
taking place in different communities of the Diaspora, it is important
for the Armenian donor to think twice before making a decision to
donate. Remember, not all that glitters is gold. It is important
to differentiate between short-sighted benevolence and long-term
sustainability. We should look a few steps ahead and understand the
need to amend the agenda. The leadership of "Hayastan" All-Armenian
Fund is infested with the authorities who have failed the Armenian
people in so many ways that the only support they need is a helping
hand to get rid of their yoke. Diaspora needs to form a new generation
of organizations that demand government accountability, rather than
fix and cover up a few of the countless consequences of government
corruption.
Ara K. Manoogian is a human rights activist representing the
Shahan Natalie Family Foundation in Artsakh and Armenia; a Fellow
of the Washington-based Policy Forum Armenia (PFA); creator
ofwww.thetruthmustbetold.com and author of the white paper "To
Donate Or Not To Donate", an in depth study on the activities of the
"Hayastan" All-Armenia Fund.
From: Baghdasarian