Tweet
"European" Armenians
Editorial, 31 August 2014
"In its history, culture and desire for rapprochement with Europe,
Armenia is a deeply European state..." said French Ambassador Henri
Reynaud during Bastille Day celebrations in Armenia on July 14. But is
Armenia really in Europe? Are Armenians European? Is identity
designated geographically, culturally or racially? Does it matter
whether we are European or not?
To consider--as most people do--the Ural Mountains are the static
dividing line between Asia and Europe would be inaccurate. History
shows that Europe's eastern boundaries have been elastic. A millennium
ago the River Don was the boundary between Asia and Europe. At the end
of the 15th century the line advanced to the banks of the Volga River.
A century later the demarcation line had reached the River Ob. In the
19th century the Urals affixed the boundary between the two
continents. In the 20th century the boundary shifted to the banks of
the Rivers Emba and Kerch, near Kazakhstan. Clearly, in the past
millennium geography has not been the determinant of Europe's eastern
boundaries.
Culturally, Armenia is a blend of the East and the West. While in
recent decades Johnny-come-lately Turkey has typically barged in to
claim that it's 'the' bridge between Asia and Europe, Armenia was the
original bridge for two-thousand years. Surrounded by Muslim nations
(and sometimes occupied by them), Armenians are Christians--a faith
they share with Europeans. Christianity has also been the main channel
of Armenian cultural expression in the past 1,700 years.
Even before the birth of Christ, Armenians were rubbing shoulders with
the Greeks and the Romans: sometimes fighting them; sometime occupied
by them; sometimes forming alliances with them. A few decades after
the Crucifixion, King Drtad I of Armenia received his crown from
Emperor Nero. Armenia maintained relations with the West through
Byzantium, the eastern half of the Roman Empire. In the Middle Ages
Armenia even sent missionaries and monks to far away Ireland. Then
came the Crusaders and further alliances with the West. A number of
respected scholars believe that in addition to exporting Armenian
military architecture to Europe, the Crusaders took Armenian civic
architecture to Europe. The latter was given the "Gothic" misnomer in
Europe, although the Goths were barbarians whose contribution to
Europe was pillage and death; they were forerunners of the marauding
Turkic tribes.
After the fall of Ani, many Armenians fled to Eastern Europe and
established towns, trading posts as far north as Poland. By the 16th
century Armenian merchants were traipsing up and down Europe thus
continuing cultural cross-pollination between Armenia and Europe.
After the establishment of the Romanov dynasty Armenians began their
tortuous and prolonged campaign to persuade Russia to liberate Armenia
from Turkish/Persian rules. In the 18th and 19th century Armenians
came to perceive Europe as the fountain of modern civilization and
progress. Armenian young men in Tiflis and in Constantinople headed to
Venice, Vienna, Berlin, Moscow, Dorbat (then German-ruled Estonia),
and Paris for their education. They returned brimming with ideas of
the Enlightenment. Armenians have maintained that cultural
adoration/aspiration, and imitated Western ideals and values. In the
60 years following the Genocide, Armenians, who had survived the
Genocide and settled in the Middle East, were often modems between
Western culture and the Arab world.
If race is the determinant as to what continent Armenia belongs,
Armenia would be as European as the denizens of London, Paris and
Rome. Like them, Armenians belong to the Aryan (not a scientific term)
race and their language is Indo-European.
What would be the benefits, for Armenia, to be considered European?
It's certainly not an admission ticket to the European Union. Neither
will it guarantee Armenia's security. Europe can't defend Armenia
against Turkey. Armenia also can't expect the United States to abandon
its long-time ally Turkey for Armenia: when America considers Asian
and Muslim Turkey far more important than European and Christian
Greece, what chance does Armenia have of American support in case of
conflict with Turkey?
Some political pundits and scholars in Armenia and in the Diaspora
insist that Armenians are in denial and that Armenia is a Middle
Eastern country with a future that should be firmly in the East.
However, the East right now is not an option for Armenia: Turkey and
Azerbaijan are hostile; the Arab world continues to be in tumult; in
Central Asia the people are mostly Turkic. While Tehran is eager to
solidify its relations with Armenia, Iran is isolated since the West
decided to make it a pariah state. As well, Iran is not a big player
on the world political or economic stage.
While Arab countries co-operate, to some extent, with other Arab
countries because of shared religion, ethnicity and cultural affinity,
Armenia doesn't have similar "siblings". In most places outside the
Arab world, religion, ethnicity, geography are not significant factors
in weaving alliances. What matters in international politics is naked
self-interest. Justice and religious proximity are not part of the
equation. We learned that lesson at the Congress of Vienna close to
140 years ago. We learned that lesson when Britain said its ships
couldn't climb Mount Ararat, although they could certainly climb the
much-higher Mount Everest. We learned that lesson when the French
abandoned us in Cilicia.
To be a desired friend, a country has to be desirable. To have solid
allies Armenia has to offer something (political, economic, military,
strategic, strategic, and cultural) of value to potential allies.
Whether Armenians are European or Asian is really of tertiary
importance, if not irrelevant. Besides, they say we now all live in a
flattened and "globalized" world.
http://www.keghart.com/Editorial-European
Editorial, 31 August 2014
"In its history, culture and desire for rapprochement with Europe,
Armenia is a deeply European state..." said French Ambassador Henri
Reynaud during Bastille Day celebrations in Armenia on July 14. But is
Armenia really in Europe? Are Armenians European? Is identity
designated geographically, culturally or racially? Does it matter
whether we are European or not?
To consider--as most people do--the Ural Mountains are the static
dividing line between Asia and Europe would be inaccurate. History
shows that Europe's eastern boundaries have been elastic. A millennium
ago the River Don was the boundary between Asia and Europe. At the end
of the 15th century the line advanced to the banks of the Volga River.
A century later the demarcation line had reached the River Ob. In the
19th century the Urals affixed the boundary between the two
continents. In the 20th century the boundary shifted to the banks of
the Rivers Emba and Kerch, near Kazakhstan. Clearly, in the past
millennium geography has not been the determinant of Europe's eastern
boundaries.
Culturally, Armenia is a blend of the East and the West. While in
recent decades Johnny-come-lately Turkey has typically barged in to
claim that it's 'the' bridge between Asia and Europe, Armenia was the
original bridge for two-thousand years. Surrounded by Muslim nations
(and sometimes occupied by them), Armenians are Christians--a faith
they share with Europeans. Christianity has also been the main channel
of Armenian cultural expression in the past 1,700 years.
Even before the birth of Christ, Armenians were rubbing shoulders with
the Greeks and the Romans: sometimes fighting them; sometime occupied
by them; sometimes forming alliances with them. A few decades after
the Crucifixion, King Drtad I of Armenia received his crown from
Emperor Nero. Armenia maintained relations with the West through
Byzantium, the eastern half of the Roman Empire. In the Middle Ages
Armenia even sent missionaries and monks to far away Ireland. Then
came the Crusaders and further alliances with the West. A number of
respected scholars believe that in addition to exporting Armenian
military architecture to Europe, the Crusaders took Armenian civic
architecture to Europe. The latter was given the "Gothic" misnomer in
Europe, although the Goths were barbarians whose contribution to
Europe was pillage and death; they were forerunners of the marauding
Turkic tribes.
After the fall of Ani, many Armenians fled to Eastern Europe and
established towns, trading posts as far north as Poland. By the 16th
century Armenian merchants were traipsing up and down Europe thus
continuing cultural cross-pollination between Armenia and Europe.
After the establishment of the Romanov dynasty Armenians began their
tortuous and prolonged campaign to persuade Russia to liberate Armenia
from Turkish/Persian rules. In the 18th and 19th century Armenians
came to perceive Europe as the fountain of modern civilization and
progress. Armenian young men in Tiflis and in Constantinople headed to
Venice, Vienna, Berlin, Moscow, Dorbat (then German-ruled Estonia),
and Paris for their education. They returned brimming with ideas of
the Enlightenment. Armenians have maintained that cultural
adoration/aspiration, and imitated Western ideals and values. In the
60 years following the Genocide, Armenians, who had survived the
Genocide and settled in the Middle East, were often modems between
Western culture and the Arab world.
If race is the determinant as to what continent Armenia belongs,
Armenia would be as European as the denizens of London, Paris and
Rome. Like them, Armenians belong to the Aryan (not a scientific term)
race and their language is Indo-European.
What would be the benefits, for Armenia, to be considered European?
It's certainly not an admission ticket to the European Union. Neither
will it guarantee Armenia's security. Europe can't defend Armenia
against Turkey. Armenia also can't expect the United States to abandon
its long-time ally Turkey for Armenia: when America considers Asian
and Muslim Turkey far more important than European and Christian
Greece, what chance does Armenia have of American support in case of
conflict with Turkey?
Some political pundits and scholars in Armenia and in the Diaspora
insist that Armenians are in denial and that Armenia is a Middle
Eastern country with a future that should be firmly in the East.
However, the East right now is not an option for Armenia: Turkey and
Azerbaijan are hostile; the Arab world continues to be in tumult; in
Central Asia the people are mostly Turkic. While Tehran is eager to
solidify its relations with Armenia, Iran is isolated since the West
decided to make it a pariah state. As well, Iran is not a big player
on the world political or economic stage.
While Arab countries co-operate, to some extent, with other Arab
countries because of shared religion, ethnicity and cultural affinity,
Armenia doesn't have similar "siblings". In most places outside the
Arab world, religion, ethnicity, geography are not significant factors
in weaving alliances. What matters in international politics is naked
self-interest. Justice and religious proximity are not part of the
equation. We learned that lesson at the Congress of Vienna close to
140 years ago. We learned that lesson when Britain said its ships
couldn't climb Mount Ararat, although they could certainly climb the
much-higher Mount Everest. We learned that lesson when the French
abandoned us in Cilicia.
To be a desired friend, a country has to be desirable. To have solid
allies Armenia has to offer something (political, economic, military,
strategic, strategic, and cultural) of value to potential allies.
Whether Armenians are European or Asian is really of tertiary
importance, if not irrelevant. Besides, they say we now all live in a
flattened and "globalized" world.
http://www.keghart.com/Editorial-European