Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Armenia-Diaspora Unity Must Be Preserved At All Cost

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

  • Armenia-Diaspora Unity Must Be Preserved At All Cost

    ARMENIA-DIASPORA UNITY MUST BE PRESERVED AT ALL COST
    By Harut Sassounian

    Noyan Tapan
    Feb 3, 2010

    In recent months, as heated debates raged on the Armenia-Turkey
    Protocols, Diaspora Armenians reacted with frustration and anger at
    the damage these agreements would have caused to Armenian national
    interests.

    While Armenia's leaders have the right to take decisions on behalf of
    the country's 3 million inhabitants, they also have an obligation to
    take into account the interests of all 10 million Armenians worldwide
    on pan-Armenian issues, such as the Genocide, the Artsakh (Karabagh)
    conflict, demands from Turkey.

    In negotiating the Armenia-Turkey Protocols, Armenian officials
    should have shown more sensitivity to critical national issues. By
    signing the contested agreements with Turkey, they alarmed and deeply
    hurt Armenians worldwide. Thousands of angry demonstrators reacted
    by hurling vitriolic epithets at Pres. Sargsyan, during his October
    tour of the Diaspora to promote the Protocols. Such confrontations,
    unprecedented during earlier presidential visits, reflected negatively
    on the authorities as well as the protesting public.

    A small land-locked state faced with blockade, war, economic hardships
    and enemies on both sides, can ill afford internal divisions and
    conflicts with its Diaspora. Such discord can only please Turkish
    leaders who have made no secret of their scheme to split Armenia
    from "the radical Diaspora," thus making it easier for them to
    extract concessions on Artsakh, Genocide recognition, and demands
    for restitution.

    What lessons Armenians must now draw from the disheartening experience
    of infighting over the Protocols?

    1) Armenia's leaders should exercise greater caution and sensitivity
    by engaging in private consultations with Diasporan leaders prior to
    conducting negotiations and signing agreements on issues that impact
    the entire Armenian nation.

    2) A Diaspora-wide leadership must be elected to reflect properly
    the views of the majority of Armenians on crucial issues. Such a
    mechanism would facilitate the transmission of credible feedback from
    the Diaspora to Armenia's leaders and to governments and international
    organizations. Further details will be presented on this important
    topic in a future column.

    3) Diaspora Armenians should not let disagreements with Armenia's
    leadership discourage them from extending aid to the needy, making
    investments in the country's economy, and visiting the homeland.

    4) In addition to avoiding a split between the Diaspora and Armenia,
    it is equally important to prevent serious divisions among Diaspora
    organizations, without stifling the healthy exchange of views and
    disagreements.

    5) The Armenian President needs to receive expert advice on critical
    economic and political issues which necessitates the creation of a
    Council of Economic Advisors and a Council on Foreign Relations,
    consisting of internationally recognized experts. Furthermore,
    a team of international lawyers should be assembled to advise the
    President prior to signing international agreements in order to avoid
    fundamental mistakes which subsequently may have to be corrected by
    the Constitutional Court.

    6) The Armenian government should have assigned the Diaspora Ministry
    to serve as an unfettered channel of communication between Armenia and
    the Diaspora during the debates on the Protocols. The Ministry could
    have been the mechanism through which the concerns and complaints of
    Armenians worldwide would have been relayed to the Foreign Ministry
    and the President's office. After all, the Diaspora Ministry is
    supposed to be a bridge between the two segments of the Armenian
    nation. While it is true that the Diaspora Minister accompanied the
    President during his tour of several countries last October, the
    Ministry would have gained far more credibility had it been allowed
    to play a more independent role.

    7) Armenian officials must realize that Turkey, given its size and
    strategic location, has a greater opportunity to get its views
    publicized through the international media than it is possible
    for Armenia. Therefore, any issue on which Armenians and Turks have
    conflicting interpretations, the Turkish version will prevail by being
    more widely disseminated than the Armenian point of view. That is one
    of the reasons why agreeing to establish a "historical commission"
    was not a good idea. According to Turkish officials, the commission
    was to review the facts of the Armenian Genocide, while the Armenian
    leaders stated that its objective was to assess the consequences of
    the Genocide. Had the Protocols been ratified, the Turks would have
    proceeded to deny the facts of the Genocide and would have succeeded
    in blaming Armenians for undermining "the good work" of the commission.

    8) The Protocols, rather than helping to normalize relations between
    Armenia and Turkey, have in fact greatly damaged the prospects of such
    reconciliation. Future attempts must begin with the preliminary steps
    of opening the border and establishing diplomatic relations rather
    than cramming dozens of unrelated issues and preconditions into a
    single agreement. True reconciliation has to be based on truth and
    justice, not lies and cover ups!
Working...
X