Tweet
ANALYSIS: ARMENIAN GOVERNMENT NEEDS DIASPORA SUPPORT AS BADLY AS EVER
By Naira Hayrumyan
ArmeniaNow
28.09.11 | 11:53
Photo: www.president.am
President Serzh Sargsyan met with Diaspora in Los Angeles.
On a recent visit to the United States, Armenian President Serzh
Sargsyan tirelessly repeated a mantra that others before him have
established: the potential of the Diaspora in addressing pan-Armenian
problems is not being used fully. The president called on Diaspora
Armenians to come to Armenia and make investments - even if they
don't like the current leadership.
If Sargsyan had any doubt of his government's popularity among the
approximately seven-million Diaspora, signs of Diaspora discontent
were evidenced when the highly-influential Armenian Revolutionary
Federation's Western US central committee initially refused to attend
a reception in honor of Sargsyan.
In an statement prior to the president's visit, ARF said Sargsyan's
presence would "cast a shadow on the idea of independence and denigrate
the struggle of our people for the restoration of justice."
Later, nevertheless, the ARF accepted the invitation, but did not
retract its statement.
Before Sargsyan left for the United States, Yerevan hosted a
pan-Armenian forum to discuss prospects for deepening cooperation
between Armenia and its Diaspora. But the "highlight" of the forum
was the speech by Catholicos Aram I, of the Great House of Cilicia
(the second of four branches of the Armenian Apostolic Church),
who accused the Armenian authorities of depopulating the country and
carrying out criminal policies.
Both statements have evoked a broad response both in Armenia and
Armenian communities abroad. It became obvious that many in the
Diaspora do not approve of the policies of Armenia's current leadership
and that is being seen as a reason why the Diaspora potential is not
being used to the full in developing Armenia.
Meanwhile, the Diaspora has no institutional bodies of influence on
the policies of the Armenian leadership, even on issues of pan-Armenian
concern. Over the 20 years of independence Armenia has failed to set up
a Diaspora body that could make decisions on matters of all-national
importance, issues that cannot be resolved without the Diaspora's
involvement. (While the Sargsyan government established a Ministry of
Diaspora, that institution's influence or participation in Diaspora
life has been primarily symbolic and has concerned itself more with
cultural affairs.)
The Armenian nation faced one such issue in 2009 when the leadership
of Armenia initiated a rapprochement with Turkey. In the Diaspora,
which was formed as a direct result of the genocidal policies of
Turkey and which has serious territorial and material claims to Ankara,
the decision of the Armenian leadership caused a mighty storm.
Views were expressed that the Armenian authorities have no right to
speak on behalf of the entire Armenian people and that relations with
Turkey are that very issue that concerns the entire nation.
Then, Sargsyan was compelled to tour major cities of the world that
have large Armenian communities. In many cities including Paris,
Beirut and New York, he was met with protests. ARF Dashnaktsutyun,
which wields influence among a considerable part of Diaspora Armenians,
had left the ruling coalition in Yerevan.
Then it became clear that there is no single institution that could
play at least an advisory role in making pan-Armenian decisions.
Will Armenian American businessmen lend an ear to Sargsyan's appeal and
make investments in Armenia? One of the features of Armenians in the
U.S. is their pragmatism, and before they make sure changes are taking
place in Armenia, the investment climate is improving and the Diaspora
is not seen in Yerevan as a cash cow, they are unlikely to do so.
By Naira Hayrumyan
ArmeniaNow
28.09.11 | 11:53
Photo: www.president.am
President Serzh Sargsyan met with Diaspora in Los Angeles.
On a recent visit to the United States, Armenian President Serzh
Sargsyan tirelessly repeated a mantra that others before him have
established: the potential of the Diaspora in addressing pan-Armenian
problems is not being used fully. The president called on Diaspora
Armenians to come to Armenia and make investments - even if they
don't like the current leadership.
If Sargsyan had any doubt of his government's popularity among the
approximately seven-million Diaspora, signs of Diaspora discontent
were evidenced when the highly-influential Armenian Revolutionary
Federation's Western US central committee initially refused to attend
a reception in honor of Sargsyan.
In an statement prior to the president's visit, ARF said Sargsyan's
presence would "cast a shadow on the idea of independence and denigrate
the struggle of our people for the restoration of justice."
Later, nevertheless, the ARF accepted the invitation, but did not
retract its statement.
Before Sargsyan left for the United States, Yerevan hosted a
pan-Armenian forum to discuss prospects for deepening cooperation
between Armenia and its Diaspora. But the "highlight" of the forum
was the speech by Catholicos Aram I, of the Great House of Cilicia
(the second of four branches of the Armenian Apostolic Church),
who accused the Armenian authorities of depopulating the country and
carrying out criminal policies.
Both statements have evoked a broad response both in Armenia and
Armenian communities abroad. It became obvious that many in the
Diaspora do not approve of the policies of Armenia's current leadership
and that is being seen as a reason why the Diaspora potential is not
being used to the full in developing Armenia.
Meanwhile, the Diaspora has no institutional bodies of influence on
the policies of the Armenian leadership, even on issues of pan-Armenian
concern. Over the 20 years of independence Armenia has failed to set up
a Diaspora body that could make decisions on matters of all-national
importance, issues that cannot be resolved without the Diaspora's
involvement. (While the Sargsyan government established a Ministry of
Diaspora, that institution's influence or participation in Diaspora
life has been primarily symbolic and has concerned itself more with
cultural affairs.)
The Armenian nation faced one such issue in 2009 when the leadership
of Armenia initiated a rapprochement with Turkey. In the Diaspora,
which was formed as a direct result of the genocidal policies of
Turkey and which has serious territorial and material claims to Ankara,
the decision of the Armenian leadership caused a mighty storm.
Views were expressed that the Armenian authorities have no right to
speak on behalf of the entire Armenian people and that relations with
Turkey are that very issue that concerns the entire nation.
Then, Sargsyan was compelled to tour major cities of the world that
have large Armenian communities. In many cities including Paris,
Beirut and New York, he was met with protests. ARF Dashnaktsutyun,
which wields influence among a considerable part of Diaspora Armenians,
had left the ruling coalition in Yerevan.
Then it became clear that there is no single institution that could
play at least an advisory role in making pan-Armenian decisions.
Will Armenian American businessmen lend an ear to Sargsyan's appeal and
make investments in Armenia? One of the features of Armenians in the
U.S. is their pragmatism, and before they make sure changes are taking
place in Armenia, the investment climate is improving and the Diaspora
is not seen in Yerevan as a cash cow, they are unlikely to do so.