Tweet
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.
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.