CC BY
61ARMENIA - DIASPORA: NEW CHALLENGES
Gagik Terterov *
On the occasion of the 100th Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide there are many messages and publications, events and various gatherings. The message of the Pope Francis and meetings at the top political level in Yerevan were especially noteworthy. By and large the organizational efforts were effective and contributed to both providing an international spin to the issue and consolidating the Armenian public.
In parallel to all that it is sometimes useful to step aside from the traditions formed around this issue and try a slightly different approach to the century-old realities.
The primary tenet that we believe needs to be accepted is that the Armenian public and especially our political elite, the parties, intellectuals and the Church, have their share of responsibility with regards to the Genocide. They failed (with exception of a few individuals) to grasp the political realities and processes of the time, to predict and forestall the catastrophic developments. By force of circumstances the Western Armenian part of that very elite was first to fall victim of the 1915 Genocide. This demonstrates that, unfortunately, the Armenian society had neither a national strategy nor means and tools to implement one. In turn, a culture of strategic thinking and political prognosis is formed based on intellectual potential and organizational capacities, and thus, the insufficient level thereof at the time has to be admitted.
A century thereafter, Armenia and Diaspora face a situation that also needs to be adequately comprehended and assessed. The urgency of this stems from the global restructuring process: the monopole world order declines and a multipolar one is formed instead, with all the resultant geopolitical, economic, and value system changes. Military and political tensions increase throughout the world, as relations between major geopolitical actors reach the conflict stage, and run under rules ' Expert.
55
G.Terterov
<21st CENTURY», № 1 (17), 2015
of a new, “Second Cold War” [1, 2]. The current phase of history is likely to become a turning point. In a way, it can be compared to the reshaping the world and revolutionary shifts during the World War I period, or the collapse of the USSR and subsequent processes that were taking place in not so distant past. Undoubtedly, this phenomenon of systemic restructuring has to be understood in its content and subjected to scenario analysis, only based on which it would be possible to develop strategic programs in line with the interests of the Armenian public.
Without discussing the entirety of global processes, we shall briefly touch upon the processes that occur in our geographic vicinities. In this tactical dimension the most vivid manifestations of the situation are the so-called “hybrid” wars in the Greater Middle East (GME) and Ukraine. An attempt is made below to review concisely the processes in these regions from the perspective of the security of Armenia, that is Republic of Armenia (RoA) and Nagorno Karabakh Republic (NKR), as well as Armenian Diaspora communities.
The Greater Middle East
The Iraqi war (2003), “Arab Spring” and self-declaration of the Islamic State (IS) wreaked havoc in the region, which brought sufferings to the local Armenian communities, sometimes leading to their irreversible demise. These communities are not only direct successors of the Western Armeniancy, but also the carriers and disseminators of the Western Armenian culture. In this respect the developments in GME can be perceived continuation of the Genocide. Obviously, the Middle Eastern processes are a direct threat for the Diaspora and the entire Armeniancy. Admittedly, we were not prepared to face these challenges and unfortunately, to date we have no programs and capabilities to respond them in a combined manner.
At the same time, the Middle Eastern processes need to be interpreted from the perspective of information policy. As it is known, mass murder and deportation (in millions) of population based on religious and ethnic affiliations takes place in GME, along with destruction of cultural assets that belong to the whole humankind. The responsibility for these realities lies with the countries whose military/political activities created conditions for such genocide to happen [3]. Perhaps, it is worth that our scholars of Genocide Studies pay attention to this phenomenon, not least because Turkey has assumed a direct role in the war against Syria and unfolding of
56
«21st CENTURY», № 1 (17), 2015
G.Terterov
Islamic extremism, and thus continues today its genocide-begetting policies.
The developments in the GME pose threats to the security of not only Diaspora, but also Armenia (RoA and NKR). Chaotic situation prompts the regional states to conduct more self-directed and sometimes, more aggressive policies, and drop accords and treaties concluded before. This can be noticed especially on the examples of Israel and Turkey; particularly, in disagreements and chilliness observed in their relations with the USA. In addition, competition grows between Iran, Israel and Turkey for the leadership in the region. Turkish plans for creating nuclear weapon should be viewed in this very context [4]. Evidently, this problem must be perceived as an utterly serious challenge for Armenia and Diaspora. It has to be noted that this problem also failed to find its way into the list of issues watched by the Armenian public or otherwise brought to the information forefront. Meanwhile, nuclear arms in hands of a state with genocidal traditions are multiplicatively dangerous.
It is characteristic that in order to act more independently from the West and increase its autonomy, Turkey seeks to establish strategic partnership with Russia. In turn, Western sanctions imposed on Russia drive Moscow to closer relations with Ankara. Such political logic is somewhat reminiscent of the Moscow-Ankara close cooperation precedent in 1920s. It is especially worrisome that economic interaction points between these two countries include not just Russian natural gas transit, but also nuclear energy. On the other hand, unlike the situation in the 20th century, Russia is the security guarantor of Armenia and hence a “nuclear shield” against Turkey1. Yet we need to consider that such “shield” is functional today because of the system formed by the charismatic leader of Russia, whereas in the long term the said guarantees are not all that unequivocal and clear-cut.
The ISnegative factor is not limited to Turkey. In some scenarios the ISmili-tants may bring their activities to Caucasus and Caspian Sea region (which partially happens already2) and hence, destabilize also South Caucasus [5]. Such developments pose an immediate threat Armenia, too. It also has to be noted that Islamic extremists may take advantage of some “colored revolution” sentiments existing in
1 Гагик Арутюнян, «Наихудший сценарий – реализация Турцией своих амбиций по созданию ядерного оружия», http://www.golosarmenii.am/article/26167/naixudshij-scenarij-%E2%80%93-realizaciya-turciej-svoix-ambicij-po-sozdaniyu-yadernogo-oruzhiya---.
2 See, for example: Станислав Иванов, «Россия в борьбе с исламистскими группировками», http://ru.journal-neo.org/2015/03/08/rus-rossiya-v-bor-be-s-islamistskimi-gruppirovkami/.
57
G.Terterov
<21st CENTURY», № 1 (17), 2015
the Azerbaijani society. As the Arab and Ukrainian experiences have shown, situations resulting from such revolutions are first of all exploited by extremists, which have militias and clear-cut action plans. Such a radicalized Azerbaijan would be incomparably more dangerous for Armenia in all aspects. Though it seems the likelihood of this scenario is low, but it needs to be analyzed and taken into account. In addition, similar scenarios are possible for Turkey as well, the “moderate Islamic” government of which may turn into a radical one. Here we must definitely bear in mind the circumstance that in person of Turkey and Azerbaijan we are dealing with two mutually accrete states and peoples.
However, the rise of extremism occurs not only in the GME region.
Ukraine
Another color revolution that was fomented by external forces in this country in 2014 occurred in the context of the “Second Cold War” and was aimed against Russia. Without going too deep into these processes, we shall briefly examine their impact on the Armenian public and state. It is known that about 100,000 Armenians are officially residents of Ukraine1 and rise of nationalism in the country coupled with deepening crisis in governance and economy negatively impact their lives. Many of our compatriots that live in Donetsk and Lugansk Oblasts are affected by military clashes and have found themselves in particularly difficult conditions. Ethnic Armenian refugees now arrive in Armenia not only from the Middle East, but also from Ukraine. Also, the developments in this country and related sanctions imposed by the West on Russia bear quite negative consequences for the Russian economy and hence, for 2 million Armenians that reside there. In particular, devaluation of ruble in 2014 resulted in a 10.7% decline of money transfers from Russia to Armenia. These transfers constitute over 80% of total private remittances. It has to be noted that the “Russian transfers” have an important role in the Armenian economy. For instance, in 2013 their share in the RoA GDP comprised 15.4% ($1.6 billion). The significance of this factor is rather high given Armenia’s quite low ranking of the GDP per capita (115th among the world countries). Therefore, based on this parameter alone it can be argued that the Ukrainian conflict has negatively influenced the Armenian economy.
1 As a rule, the actual numbers of Armenians residing in post-Soviet countries is 10-20% larger than the officially registered numbers.
58
«21st CENTURY», № 1 (17), 2015
G.Terterov
Generally, the Ukrainian crisis and strained relations between Russia and NATO have adverse effects on Armenia’s security. The recent extensive military activities of Azerbaijan can be explained in part by these tensions. However, there are also some positive corollaries. Crimea’s unification with the Russian Federation and the struggle of Donbass and Lugansk for autonomy are important for us as vivid manifestations of peoples’ self-determination. Also, in geopolitical terms, given Armenia’s membership in CSTO and EAEU, Crimean unification significantly obstructs Turkey’s ambitions to turn the Black Sea into an “internal pond”, which certainly would have materialized if this peninsula remained part of Ukraine1.
Thus, it can be stated that due to developments occurring in more or less close neighborhood to Armenia, a considerable part of Armeniancy is in a quite dangerous situation, which requires deep comprehension, analysis and assessment. Such work implies consolidation, appropriate guidance and effective management of the national intellectual resources. Nonetheless, both Armenia and Diaspora face serious difficulties in this matter.
The intellectual potential of Armenia has qualitatively declined as a result of revolutionary changes and “vulgar liberalization” after the collapse of the USSR. Hundreds of research institutions, engineering companies and hi-tech factories had been shut down. The current state of economy prevents adequate funding of science and education. It is disturbing that in the last two decades not only the population of the country has dwindled2, but also the structure of society has changed with service and trade sector workers dominating [6]. Suffice it to say that according to some expert assessments the number of those involved in so-called complex work (from qualified laborers to renowned scientists) has declined tenfold even by the most optimistic estimates. According to the official data, the number of researchers has decreased five times, from 30,000 to about 6,000. Decline of the scientific and educational sector is exemplified by the fact that in international ratings Yerevan State University is ranked lower than 1400th.
The state of the intellectual potential is not reassuring in Diaspora, too. One of the largest losses in the recent years was the closure of Melkonian Educational Insti-
1 Гагик Арутюнян, «Возврата к прежнему статусу Крыма уже не будет», http://www.noravank.am/rus/articles/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=12594
2 In 1989 the population of Armenia was 3.3 million, which the forecasts for 2020 and 203 are 2.5 and 2.0 million, respectively. Note that for the same years the corresponding population numbers for Azerbaijan are 7.0, 10.0 and 10.5 million.
59
G.Terterov
<21st CENTURY», № 1 (17), 2015
tute. The centers for Armenian Studies do not fare well either. According to Nora-vank Foundation experts, only 14 out of 90 such centers in foreign countries are involved to one or another extent (unfortunately, often not at a high level) in pressing matters of Armeniancy [7]. As for the Armenian media in Diaspora, sometimes their approaches to geopolitical realities are somewhat simplistic [8]. The existing state of affairs stems in part from the reality that the so-called “Armenian capital” (both in Armenia and Diaspora) does not have a good idea about the current situation in Armenia and Diaspora, or their “coordinates” in the global system. Unsurprisingly, the importance of developing the intellectual potential is not comprehended. As a result, their “patriotic” activities outside their main business often are limited to placing yet another khachkar at some site. It has to be noted that in the conditions of increasing military and political turbulence the international law and regulations rapidly lose their value. This means the Armenian hopes that the “favorable attitude” of the international community toward the Armenian Cause may lead to fulfilling our demands, for example, in accordance to the Treaty of Sevres, are futile, and hence, precarious.
Meanwhile, the situation is quite different with our adversaries. In Turkey, an economically developed country (17th biggest GDP in the world), there are 186 universities and $24 billion is allocated to education. The Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2013-2014 placed five Turkish universities among the top 500. According to the US National Science Foundation’s R&D activity indicators in 2014 Turkey ranked 19th in the world. It is also one of the leading countries by book publication and reading: 42,626 new books were published in Turkey in 20121.
What is worth a special attention is that about 100 think tanks have been founded in Turkey, a large part of which conduct analysis and strategic research. Some them develop special political technologies to neutralize Armenian demand initiatives, with main emphasis on the Armenian Diaspora [9]. In addition, the Azeri research structures that previously had no much success are stepping up their activities [10].
1 See: Հրատարակությունները Հայաստանի Հանրապետությունում 2013թ. Վիճակագրական ժողովածու, Երևան, ՀԱԳ, 2014, էջ 8, http://book-chamber.am/pdf/statistika-mamul2013_new.pdf.
2012 Turkiye Kitap Pazari Raporu, “Turkiye Yayincilar Birligi -Resmi sitesi” http://www.turkyaybir.org.tr/yayincilik-sektoru-verileri/2012-turkiye-kitap-pazari-raporu/475.
60
21st CENTURY», № 1 (17), 2015
G.Terterov
Some Conclusions
One of the British analysts researching the Artsakh conflict has stated in a publication that the Armenians won the war because of “technological superiority” (or worded differently, intellectual resources) over the adversary. In the current historical period, which also has a turning point significance, the mentioned superiority has unfortunately diminished considerably and this situation must be perceived as an extremely serious challenge for Armenia and Diaspora. At the same time, there is no doubt that our creative people can quickly fill this gap, if adequate attention and organization is in place. In particular, one of the urgent matters to be considered is creation of think tanks with participation of Armenia and Diaspora, which would analyze the “Armenian problems”, develop national strategic programs and political/economic technologies for implementation of the latter.
Mach 2015
References and Literature
1. Гагик Арутюнян, О некоторых особенностях «Холодной войны-2», «21-й Век», # 2(31), с. 3, 2014.
2. Richard N Haass, The Unraveling, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 93, #6, 2014.
3. Gagik Harutyunyan, The Multipolar Realities, Middle East and News Ticker Genocide, «21st Century», #2(14), p. 3, 2013.
4. Գազիկ Հարությունյան, Թուրքական միջուկային սպառնալիքը, «Նորավանք» ԳԿՀ, «Գլոբուս», #4 (25), 2012թ., Արա Մարջանյան, Միջուկային Թուրքիա, «Նորավանք» ԳԿՀ, «Գլոբուս», #4, 2012թ., Հայկ Գաբրիելյան, 2023 թվականը միջուկային երկրի կարգավիճակով դիմավորելու Թուրքիայի հավակնության շուրջ, «Գլոբուս» վերլուծական հանդես, #10, 2014։
5. С. Иванов, Радикальный ислам как угроза международной безопасности, «Зарубежное военное обозрение», с. 22, #1(814), 2015.
6. Գազիկ Հարությունյան, Ժողովրդագրություն, զարգացման ռազմավարություն և տեխնոլոգիաներ, «21-րդ ԴԱՐ», #1(58), էջ 5, 2015:
7. ԱՍիմավորյան, Վ.Հովյան, ՏՂանաչանյան, Արտերկրի հայագիտական կենտրոնները. ներուժի գնահատում, Երևան, «Նորավանք» ԳԿՀ, 2014:
8. ԱԺամակոչյան, ԱՄանուսյան, Դ. Գալստյան, ԼՀակոբյան, Սփյուռքի դիրքորոշումները ՀՀ աշխարհաքաղաքական կողմնորոշումների շուրջ, Երևան, «Նորավանք» ԳԿՀ, 2014:
9. Արեստակես Սիմավորյան, «Թուրքիայի ուղեղային կենտրոնների զարգացման նախադրյալները. այժմեական խնդիրները», «21-րդ ԴԱՐ», # 6, 2012, էջ 20:
10. Կարեն Վերանյան, Հարավային Կովկասի երկրների գիտահետազոտական գործունեությունը. վիճակագրական վերլուծություն, « 21-րդ ԴԱՐ», #1(58), 2015:
61
