Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Armenian Weekly; May 24, 2008; Commentary

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Armenian Weekly; May 24, 2008; Commentary

    The Armenian Weekly On-Line
    80 Bigelow Avenue
    Watertown MA 02472 USA
    (617) 926-3974
    [email protected]

    http://www.a rmenianweekly.com

    The Armenian Weekly; Volume 74, No. 20; May 24, 2008

    Commentary:

    1. Reflections on the 90th Anniversary of the First Republic
    By Michael G. Mensoian

    2. Recognizing our fate and May 28
    By Lucine Kasbarian

    3. Armenian Independence: A Debate of Two Dates
    By Tom Vartabedian

    4. May 28
    By C.K. Garabed

    ***

    1. Reflections on the 90th Anniversary of the First Republic
    By Michael G. Mensoian

    The 90th anniversary of the independence of the First Republic brings to
    mind events that were the most unlikely precursors to its creation. During
    the period from April 24, 1915 through 1923, the Armenian nation not only
    experienced the excruciating agony of the genocide, but the independent
    Armenia created by the Treaty of Sevres fell victim to the perfidiousness
    and self-interests of Western democracies. Dissident Turks under Mustafa
    Kemal Ataturk rebelled against their government's acceptance of the treaty
    provisions partitioning Anatolia. The Kemalists were unhindered as they
    sought to re-establish control over their Anatolian provinces. The October
    Revolution that brought the Bolsheviks to power in Russia was a fortuitous
    event for the Kemalists. The Bolsheviks, capitulating to the German demands
    in the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, abandoned the Caucasus front allowing the
    Kemalists to occupy its eastern provinces and push toward the Caucasus. The
    Armenians were left alone to protect the remnant Armenian population in
    eastern Anatolia and to confront the Turkish forces as they advanced toward
    the Armenian core area of Yerevan and Alexandropol. Gathering what troops,
    volunteers, and conscripts they could, the Armenian forces defeated a much
    larger Turkish force in the epic Battle of Sadarabad-epic because it
    literally saved the Armenian nation from complete annihilation.

    >From this victory, the First Republic was born on May 28, 1918 under the
    aegis of the Dashnaktsutiun. From its inception, the republic was faced with
    severe shortages of food and shelter as it sought to care for the tens of
    thousands of refugees. At the same time, the government was beset from
    within and without by the subversive activities of the Russian Bolsheviks
    and their Armenian counterpart. Unable to continue, the First Republic
    officially ceased on Dec. 1, 1920. The Treaty of Lausanne, ratified in 1923,
    replaced the Treaty of Sevres. Defeated Ottoman Turkey now under the
    leadership of Mustafa Kemal was actually rewarded. Turkey was recognized as
    a sovereign state encompassing its Anatolian provinces with a European
    foothold across the Straits. The new treaty ignored the Armenian Genocide
    and Armenian independence.

    For seven decades, Armenia endured as a Soviet republic. During these many
    years, throughout the diaspora, May 28th-Independence Day of the First
    Republic-was celebrated. Testament to the indomitable spirit and ceaseless
    efforts of the Dashnaktsutiun, faith finally gave birth to reality on Sept.
    21, 1991 when a second republic was declared during the waning days of the
    Soviet Union. Paradoxically the diaspora that had become an unwanted legacy
    of the Armenian Genocide had by then developed into a vibrant system of
    communities worldwide that were willing and able to assist their newly
    independent homeland in responding to the myriad problems common to all
    emergent countries. This was in stark contrast to the First Republic that
    could rely on no effective assistance from beyond its borders.

    The Armenian nation had not only overcome the catastrophic effects of the
    genocide but also the sterile socio-economic and cultural environment that
    had been foisted upon them by the Soviets after the collapse of the First
    Republic. The Armenian nation that a succession of Turkish leaders and their
    Azeri counterparts believed had been ground into oblivion in the "ashes" of
    the genocide and soviet domination now had risen like the proverbial
    Phoenix.

    The Armenians of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabagh) were no less fortunate. Time and
    again they had been thwarted by Moscow in their desire to secure
    independence from Azerbaijan. For nearly seven decades they too had chafed
    under the rule of Soviet Azeri leadership. The determination of the Ottoman
    Turkish leaders to empty their eastern provinces of their Armenian
    population that fueled the genocide continued unabated in a different form
    when Artsakh was given by Russia to Azerbaijan. Can it honestly be said that
    during the years that Artsakh was under Azeri rule the Armenian and his
    cultural heritage were respected? Or that the Azeri government ever sought
    to provide even the basic infrastructure that would allow the Armenians to
    develop a viable economic and social life? Or that Armenian families were
    able to provide unhindered a better life for their children within the
    context of their own culture? Discrimination, economic exploitation, and
    deprivation were all that the government at Baku had determined their
    Armenian minority deserved. Their objective was to create such intolerable
    conditions in Artsakh that Armenian families would abandon their homes and
    lands. Did this differ from the conditions that the Armenian population
    endured within Ottoman Turkey prior to the genocide?

    Today Artsakh enjoys its independence only because some 7,000 azatamartiks
    willingly gave their lives for their people's freedom. Is there not a
    parallel between Artsakh and the sacrifices at Sadarabad that led to the
    independence, limited in time that it was, of the First Republic? On the
    occasion of its 90th anniversary, might Armenians contemplate what could
    have been if the republic had survived? Will history record that Artsakh's
    independence was also short lived?

    Unlike the First Republic, whose existence and ultimate demise had limited
    ramifications beyond its own borders, the situation in Artsakh cannot be
    viewed as some isolated event existing in a vacuum. Artsakh has meaning that
    reaches beyond its borders and its heroic population that impacts Armenia,
    the diaspora, and the Dashnaktsutiun. Should Artsakh revert to Azeri
    control, no amount of rationalizing could mitigate the significance of this
    defeat. Unfortunately, any objective assessment of the current situation
    vis-a-vis Azerbaijan offers few, if any, simple solutions. It becomes
    necessary, at the least, to accept as highly unlikely that current
    negotiations will be able to resolve the issue of Artsakh's independence.
    However, diplomacy requires that "good faith" efforts be continued under the
    auspices of the Minsk Group. Yet, Azerbaijan's claim of territorial
    inviolability openly supported by the United States and Artsakh's demand for
    independence represent opposite ends of a continuum which is devoid of any
    meaningful middle ground. Each side holds antipodean positions.

    Given this reality, the present situation begs a proactive effort by a
    specially formed committee (the "Artsakh Committee") to undertake two
    simultaneous responsibilities in support of Artsakh's position. Such a
    committee would most effectively operate under an existing international
    entity such as the Dashnaktsutiun.

    Its primary function would be to develop materials for publication in
    various media and for dissemination to appropriate individuals and audiences
    that explain the moral and political justification of Artsakh's position. An
    added responsibility that the Artsakh Committee would shoulder is the
    capability to immediately counter in any forum or effort by Azerbaijan to
    influence opinion or settlement of the issue in its favor. A recent
    resolution submitted by Azerbaijan to the United Nations General Assembly
    called for (in addition to other demands) the immediate withdrawal of
    Armenian forces from its territory. Although it was approved on a 49 to 7
    vote, it was in essence a "victory" for Armenia and the role of the Minsk
    Group co-chaired by France, Russia, and the United States, which voted "no."
    Of the 192 member states of the United Nations, 146 either abstained or did
    not want to participate. There is nothing to suggest that a future vote
    would be favorable for Armenia and Artsakh. The need for the Artsakh
    Committee to prepare position papers that would be readily available and
    selectively distributed to support the reasonableness and the justification
    of Artsakh's position should be apparent.

    A secondary function would be to publicize the dangers inherent in the
    unilateral expansion by Azerbaijan of its military establishment and the
    constant threat by the Azeri political and military leadership to solve the
    Artsakh issue by military means. The threat this poses to regional stability
    is real. Attention should be called to the disparity in the aid Azerbaijan
    receives from the United States compared to Armenia (hopefully to be changed
    under a new administration), as well as the huge disparity in the annual
    government appropriations for military procurement that exists between Baku
    and Yerevan. Position papers citing the danger inherent in any military
    adventurism by Azerbaijan within the Caucasus region should be readily
    available.

    A cogent relationship must be developed connecting Artsakh's claim for
    independence with the Armenian Genocide; the treatment of Armenians during
    their years under Azeri control; and the purpose in transferring control
    from Armenia to Azerbaijan.

    Armenians should not be fearful of the threat of military action by
    Azerbaijan. The principal nation and likely the only nation that would
    support any ill-advised Azeri military action against Artsakh is Turkey.
    However, any overt or covert support from Ankara would be tempered by the
    knowledge that Russia, Iran, and even the United States would not sit idly
    by. The geo-strategic interests of Russia and Iran are aligned with the
    existence of a viable Armenia and Artsakh rather than with a
    Turkish-Azerbaijani victory. This is a diametric change from the interests
    of the Russian Bolsheviks some 90 years earlier when they sacrificed Armenia's
    historic lands to Turkey and Azerbaijan in the misguided belief that they
    would gain ideological converts.

    May 28th is an appropriate time to reflect on the past and on the
    relationship of Artsakh to Hai Tahd as homage is paid to those who
    established and served the First Republic. Artsakh represents the keystone
    of the Armenian Cause to create a unified integrated Armenia on its historic
    lands of Artsakh, Nakhichevan, Javakhk, and the western provinces. Such was
    determined by the Ninth World Congress of the ARF in 1919. The opportunity
    exists now, some 90 years later, for the spatial integration of Artsakh with
    the motherland. Failure to do so would logically call into question when or
    even if the goal of a unified integrated Armenia can ever be achieved. Any
    vacillation or compromise that allows Artsakh's independence to be subverted
    in any way whatsoever would parallel the fate of the First Republic. It
    would be a singular defeat for Armenia, the Dashnaktsutiun and to our
    brothers and sisters in Artsakh. That thought should be with those who
    commemorate Independence Day of the First Republic this year.
    -------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------

    2. Recognizing our fate and may 28
    By Lucine Kasbarian

    "One sniff and the bad memory is gone." Thus ran the headline from a recent
    article in the New Scientist magazine. According to the piece, anesthesia
    may soon be used to purge thoughts of our disturbing experiences before they
    become embedded in our memories.

    Doesn't society anesthetize us enough as it is? How can we be sure that this
    numbing procedure won't make us any different from the housewives featured
    in the film "Fahrenheit 451," where they consumed drugs to forget the
    sorrows (and joys) that make life the demanding yet rewarding existence that
    it is?

    Today's dominant cultural milieu advocates forgetting in order to dismiss
    ugly truths, transgressions, and accountability-in spite of the fact that
    (or precisely because) the perpetrators still rule and even enjoy the
    benefits of their transgressions.

    While these popular social currents carry us into a state of forgetting,
    will ignoring and even wiping out painful memories change history? Or make
    us any happier? Or change how genocide, ruin, and dispossession affected the
    lives of those exiled yesterday and today?

    What do I recall when I remember our first Armenian Independence Day?

    When I think of May 28, 1918, I recall how unbearable life was in the
    Armenian heartland, for centuries at a time, and brought to gruesome life in
    Raffi's historic novel, The Fool. Reading the book was excruciating, but it
    memorialized the nature of the Armenian character and explained why the
    Armenian liberation struggle was essential to our survival as a people. Are
    these memories all bad, and should they be anesthetized?

    When I think of May 28, I remember leafing through a picture book, Hayduk,
    containing images of our bravest Armenian resistance fighters. Some carried
    black flags that read "Mah gam azadoutiun (Death or freedom)." These
    desperate, humiliated, endangered men and women took up arms as a last
    resort and in so doing reasserted their dignity. Are these memories all bad,
    and should they be anesthetized?

    When I think of May 28, I remember our family's ancestral homes in Sepastia
    and Dikranagerd, and how with May 28, at least a portion of our native lands
    still belonged to us, rather than none. Are these memories all bad, and
    should they be anesthetized?

    When I think of May 28, I recall Antranig Zaroukian's autobiography, Men
    without Childhood, about growing up an orphaned genocide survivor. In one
    chapter, the scrappy orphans barely contained their excitement upon hearing
    that a famous writer and humorist was going to entertain them one Christmas.
    However, when the speaker, a genocide survivor himself, lay eyes upon these
    urchins, he broke down and sobbed. There was to be no comedy at the decrepit
    orphanage that day. Back then, the children were puzzled by the guest's
    behavior. It was only much later that Zaroukian understood what the speaker
    must have seen and felt. (That guest was none other than satirist Yervant
    Odian.) Are these memories all bad, and should they be anesthetized?

    When I think of May 28, I remember learning that in 1918, independence was
    thrust upon the Armenians and that it was "do or die." At the time, Turkish
    generals were known to have said that they had never seen a more formidable
    fighting force than the Armenians at Sardarabad, Bash Abaran, and
    Karakilisse. If, following our greatest national catastrophe, the Armenians
    had not defended selves and homeland with every last fiber, Armenia would
    simply have become an antique geographical term for an extinct nation, much
    like Cappadocia had become, according to Christopher Walker, author of
    Armenia: Survival of a Nation. How could one not feel proud that these
    traumatized people, surrounded by poverty, hunger, and disease, persisted
    amidst the greatest of odds? Are these memories all bad, and should they be
    anesthetized?

    When I think of May 28, I remember standing with scores of diasporan youth
    on a visit to the Sardarabad monument when Armenia was under Soviet rule. As
    we sang "Seroundner took tzez janachek, Sardarabaditz," we knew that our
    generation did indeed, to explain the words, recognize ourselves as the
    descendants of survivors called upon to carry the baton for what Sardarabad
    represented. Of all places, our summer camp was situated in Karakilisse-one
    of the three historic battlegrounds where our independence was won. Are
    these memories all bad, and should they be anesthetized?

    When I think of May 28, I remember when the Armenian tricolor flag was not
    embraced by all Armenians, and how we were frowned upon at public gatherings
    for being the children of Tashnagtzagans. And yet I remember how privileged
    I felt to sing "Haratch, nahadag tzeghi anmahner (forward, immortals of a
    martyred race)" to these very flags when I was growing up. Are these
    memories all bad, and should they be anesthetized?

    When I think of May 28, I remember attending a ceremony at the United
    Nations to celebrate the second Armenian Independence (this time from Soviet
    rule), achieved on Sept. 21, 1991. Much as I knew it was an important
    occasion, I was surprised to feel no visceral joy. Living in the faraway
    diaspora with no active involvement in this freedom struggle was the reason.
    I revisited modern Armenia thereafter to cultivate an attachment to our
    ancestral lands and people. Are these memories all bad, and should they be
    anesthetized?

    These memories are not recalled simply to mark history. Nor are they written
    here just to remind us to remember. Many serve as cautionary tales about
    conditions that still lurk in our midst.

    As my own mother's memory fades with age, she sometimes forgets who we are.
    I know she would appreciate the irony that there are some Armenians by
    contrast who do not sustain memory loss and yet still don't know who they
    are. A friend once said, "Perhaps the benefit of forgetting is that your
    mother can lay aside the haunting memories of genocide." Not so. Her
    long-term memory appears intact. As intense as those memories of genocide
    and hard-won independence may be, there is no chance of her forgetting.
    Neither will I. Our fate is our destiny. We will not run from it.

    Lucine Kasbarian is a journalist and the author of Armenia: A Rugged Land,
    an Enduring People, who wonders if there will ever come a time when we no
    longer feel like exiles.
    ------------------------------------------ -----------------------------------------------

    3 . Armenian Independence: A Debate of Two Dates
    By Tom Vartabedian

    As a conscientious Armenian and active AYFer of the 1960s, the meaning of
    May 28th, 1918 remained constant in my normal realm.

    We were taught to fight for independence, keep the vigil constant. It was
    automatic and if history serves us best, it took a long time to
    achieve-nearly 550 years if you go back to King Levon V.

    It was our cup of water after a laborious journey through the sands of time.
    And it tasted cool and refreshing, quenching the parched bodies of those who
    survived the genocide.

    The competition to get folks out to a commemoration was keen with
    graduations, Memorial Day observances and every other impediment. But we did
    it and we were all the better for it. Independence was always the Hye Road.

    May 28th was our inspiration and hope for a Renaissance given the USSR and
    Iron Curtain.

    Then, along came Sept. 21, 1991, and the New Republic-a cause for jubilation
    after 70 years of servitude.

    For seven decades, our people lived under a Soviet regime that dangled a
    carrot under Armenia's nose while the country lay shackled.

    I recall the day with deep sentiment. Champagne corks were popped in our
    church and people were dancing in the aisles during a celebration. I had the
    privilege of being in Yerevan during the 15th anniversary celebration in
    September 2006.

    Republic Square was agog with revelers-100,000 was one estimate-as planes
    roared overhead while military personnel by the droves held ground. It
    reminded me of an armistice declaration.

    What we didn't realize at the time was the controversy the two compatible
    dates might create. The question remains, "Which do we properly
    commemorate-1991 or 1918?"

    Please don't say both. Our Armenian calendar is bursting at the seams and
    yearning to breathe free with one event after another, sapping our energy
    and beckoning our time.

    Each year, our Gomideh is betwixt and between. Members feel it redundant to
    commemorate both and are more apt to lean toward 1991-the more recent and
    one achieved in our time. Historically, they were not around for 1918 and
    cannot connect with the event.

    This is the time frame that remains fresh and indelible in my mind. It
    offers a more alternative approach with our families. Would we commemorate
    the Levonian Dynasty of 1375? I do not see 451 and the Vartanantz Battle
    given its proper recognition, except in one instance. The Knights of Vartan
    do it justice but that's their intent.

    Nor is 301 and the adoption of Christianity such a vital day in our midst,
    except maybe the church. I can't recall seeing an actual date, only the
    year.

    And I can sense some resistance from ungers when the subject of the Feb.
    18th Revolt against the Soviets comes up. In their eyes, it's grown trite,
    overworked, and redundant. Other than the Lowell Gomideh, I do not see other
    committees so enamored with this historic event.

    As independence goes, the main issue I feel is to commemorate the intent,
    not the ritual.

    The skeptic in me cries out, "What's there to celebrate?" The enemy's great
    hatred is still prevalent in our country amid a papier-mache disguise one
    calls freedom. More lives are being lost now to deprivation and an extreme
    lack of economy than ever before.

    I can't help but wonder that with the current desecration of
    Nagorno-Karabagh and other territories within the homeland, the crime of
    genocide still persists in a violent and naked manner.

    The loser of this grim international game is not only Armenia but the
    dignity of all mankind who callously stands by while our gallant country is
    being dismembered.

    The recent political turmoil corroborates the languish. Destruction of our
    national monuments remains sacrilegious and immoral.

    One cannot conceive of the damaging effects that have caused us to become a
    government in exile.

    The voice of justice must be heard. It must be our voice and it must be
    spoken clear and without hypocrisy. It must come from the American
    government and from the United Nations calling for greater foreign aid, the
    removal of barriers, and passage of a long-overdue genocide bill.

    Our most sacred tenet as Armenians is our resiliency. I look to the youth
    for their lofty ideals. I look to them to keep the bonds of tradition
    fervent, much like I did when I was their age and May 28th was our
    fortitude.

    Whatever our independence celebration happens to be, I look to the
    gray-haired elders of our kind-our venerables-to enthuse our sons and
    daughters in this holy mission.

    I look to the wealthy for support and the indigent for their moral
    sustenance.

    I look to the Armenian woman for her compassion and to the clergy for their
    blessing.

    My definition of faith is walking in the dark and looking for the light. It
    is seeing rainbows when the sky is full of rain. May the restless dream of a
    united homeland will continue to burn in our sleep until it becomes an
    eternal reality.

    May 28 or Sept. 21? Whatever the date, use it to cherish freedom and support
    democracy. Gather your community intact, emphasize the cultural, and get
    your children involved.

    Often times, we need a transfusion, an energizer, a jolt of current which
    will rekindle that precious flame of nationhood. Let's dwell on the happier
    times and not the grief imposed by a genocide.

    A greater sin would be to ignore the occasion altogether. Those who shun
    independence are doomed to forsake their heritage.

    You make the choice.
    ------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------

    4. May 28
    By C.K. Garabed

    When I think of May28, I think of more than a date on the calendar, albeit a
    very important one to nationalistic Armenians.

    I ruminate on certain events of my youth that, even in my senior years,
    stand out quite vividly.

    I think of the two centers of our Armenian life in those days in Union City,
    N.J.: the Holy Cross Church and Armenia Hall. These two centers provided
    spiritual nourishment to Armenians who hungered for communion with God and
    nation. Their religious needs were ministered to by the Church, and their
    nationalistic needs were met by all that Armenia Hall represented.

    This was not only the political center for Armenians, but the cultural
    center, as well. It housed the ARF, the ARS, and the AYF. It hosted
    political, humanitarian, educational, and artistic events. It was our
    anchor, firmly holding us fast to our Armenian roots. May 28 was as holy to
    Armenia Hall as Christmas and Easter were to Holy Cross Church. And it was
    observed in both solemn and celebratory fashion with fitting programs, all
    commencing with the attendees' standing and singing "Mer Hairenik."

    The feeling of solidarity permeated every square inch of that humble
    building. Eventually it had to be sold to provide "seed money" for the
    construction of Sts. Vartanantz Church in Ridgefield, N.J.

    What also stands out in my mind when I think of those days in the 1930s,
    '40s, and '50s was the complete apathy to May 28 on the part of some other
    segments of the Armenian community. Not only was it not celebrated, it was
    totally ignored, as if the First Republic of Armenia had never existed. What's
    worse, the same situation still exists today. The congregations of the
    Giligiagan Churches continue to observe May 28, while the congregations of
    the Echmiadznagan Churches continue to ignore it.

    Another matter that stands out vividly in my memory is the vast difference
    between the two youth organizations of the time, the AYF (Armenian Youth
    Federation) and the AGAU (Armenian General Athletic Union). The AYF was a
    political, as well as social and athletic organization, while the AGAU,
    supposedly patterned after the HMEM, was strictly social and athletic. "No
    Politics!" was the AGAU's slogan. What was actually meant, and really
    achieved, was "No Nationalism!" I should know; I belonged to both
    organizations. The infusion of nationalism in the AYF, thanks to its
    founder, General Karekin Nejdeh, has produced a healthy succession of
    members who have passed on their dedication to their offspring, which
    accounts for the vibrancy of the organization to this day.

    On the other hand, the AGAU, robbed of nationalistic feelings, struggled to
    retain its Armenianness against impossible odds, and finally succumbed to
    the inevitability of time.

    As recently as two years ago, at a gathering of Seniors in an Echmiadznagan
    church, one of the members who knew where I stood as a hamagir of the ARF,
    asked me this frank question, knowing he could do so: "Does the ARF still
    indoctrinate its youth as it did in the old days?"

    I replied, "In order for me to answer your question, I would have to ask you
    to read a book. Are you willing to do so?:" When he replied in the
    affirmative, I continued, "Get an English translation of Raffi's novel The
    Fool [set in the Turkish controlled Armenia of the 1800s]. After you read
    that book, I will be ready to talk to you."

    What was my motive? Well, I knew that the questioner was quite deficient in
    his knowledge of Armenian history, and that by reading the book he just
    might come to realize how desperate the Armenian people had become because
    of their continual oppression at the hands of the Turks and Kurds.

    Unless an Armenian knows the conditions that gave rise to the formation of
    Armenian political and revolutionary parties and, eventually, May 28, one
    cannot understand the Armenian-American diaspora of today, or Armenia's and
    Artsakh's current predicament.

    I'm still waiting for him to get back to me.

    One final note: Thanks to the efforts of Vergin Tegrarian, a lon- time
    resident of Union City, and with the participation of the ANC and the
    Hamazkayin Armenian Educational and Cultural Society, the city commissioners
    and mayor of Union City have, for a number of years, commemorated on May 28
    the establishment of the First Republic of Armenia by proclamation and a
    flag raising ceremony at City Hall.

    With a symbolic ceremony, that includes the rendition of the American and
    Armenian national anthems, the city officially recognizes a member of the
    Armenian community and acknowledges the contribution made to the welfare of
    the city by Armenian immigrants who sought refuge from the Armenian Genocide
    that commenced in 1915.

    May 28 of this year marks the 9th consecutive year of the Union City
    observance where a guest speaker will deliver some fitting words to mark the
    occasion.
Working...
X