Month: December 2023

For the third consecutive year, I have been blessed with the opportunity to host Thanksgiving dinner in the Syunik province of Armenia. This year I gathered the villagers of Meghri’s Dashdoon, the neighboring village to Lijk where I currently stay. While I had originally intended to host Thanksgiving in the same village every year, to build a custom for the locals in hopes that they would organize the gathering themselves one day, this year I prioritized celebrating Thanksgiving in a village hosting Artsakhtsis, given the mass exodus from Artsakh. 

The village of Dashdoon

In September, the villagers of Dashdoon took it upon themselves to open their doors to those displaced from Artsakh, fixing up abandoned homes and offering them rent free in perpetuity to those willing to resettle in Armenia’s south. Dashdoon, which has less than 100 permanent residents, initially took in 10 families who the locals had met in Goris or had contacted in response to their Facebook posts looking for housing. Eight families totalling over 30 people remain today in Dashdoon and are set on staying in their new homes. The village now plans to reopen their school for the new children and hopes to accept more families in the coming months.

Three years ago, when I first decided to host Thanksgiving dinners in Syunik, my hope was to replicate the Armenian Relief Society Thanksgiving luncheons that I attended for years in Chicago. My first attempt was far from it, as the dinner in Davit Bek was entirely comprised of men, with the exception of one grandmother who washed dishes and her grandson who had come to help. Last year, I held two dinners, one in Ghapan’s southern Dzav village on the border with Artsakh, and one in Artsakh’s Marduni village of Ashan. Both dinners were an improvement, with a significant turnout of women and a handful of children, but it was still far from the family luncheons we enjoy in our community in the United States. 

This year’s Thanksgiving gathering

This year was by far the closest in resemblance to our diasporan Armenian community life and the most fun of all the dinners I have hosted. There were over 80 people in attendance, with all but a handful joining to feast on the local shepherds’ lambs, including all of the children of the village and many of the women and elderly. 

“It’s just jermuk, genats!”

My day began with the slaughtering of the lambs with some of the local men, a mix of Artsakhtsis and locals who had already become close friends over the last two months. For lunch we fried the organs and some of the tmag, or sheep tail, with a few toasts of local vodka before setting up the hall in preparation for dinner. Once everyone had gathered, our local Der Hayr, Der Rafael, led a prayer to start our evening. The hall was soon filled with sounds of joy and laughter as we dined together, only to be interrupted by the occasional genats (toast) to our land, families and soldiers. 

We sang and danced all night

As with every Thanksgiving I have hosted in Syunik, it was raised that this was the first time in many years that the village had gathered for a happy reason rather than for mourning. It did not take much of the local oghi for the villagers to start singing and dancing, creating a beautiful moment of peace and happiness despite the hardships and dark days we are living in. 

A week prior, my friend Shant Charchaf had toured an Artsakhtsi puppet show in Syunik. We hosted one in Dashdoon, where I learned that a few of the children from Artsakh knew how to play the shvi and dhol, but had left their instruments behind. I immediately reached out to my good friend Alek Surenian from Chicago to see if we could raise some funds to purchase instruments and lessons. We succeeded in doing so in one day, and those very instruments were put to good use at our Thanksgiving dinner. 

I want to give a special thank you to Shant and to Alek for investing in the Armenian culture of Dashdoon and to all my friends who contributed to my dinner and gave residents new and old an opportunity to spend a wonderful evening together over a delicious lamb dinner.

After only a week of searching for an apartment in Yerevan and dealing with local real estate brokers who thought that an apartment’s value lay in how close it was to a Thai massage parlor, Setrag decided to heed his parents’ advice and give their family home in Ashtarak a try. Months prior to his move, his parents bought a worn-out house outside Yerevan to renovate. The renovation was still incomplete, but there was a bed, and his father assured him with utmost confidence that all Setrag needed was to witness a single sunrise and to let the beauty of the stunning balcony view consume him in order to firmly want to stay in the family home. 

Setrag’s mom looking across the Ashtarak gorge from their balcony.

I, however, was skeptical. In his 20 years, Setrag had seen much of the most splendid corners of this world. He had seen magnificent sunsets on the shores of Portugal and the crystal beauty of Lake Como in Italy. He had sipped red wine on top of one of the thousands of islands of Greece. He had seen the breathtaking New York skyline, the mountains of Switzerland, the luxury of Dubai, the ceiling of the Sistine chapel and the ancient walls of Jerusalem. As much as I am in love with every inch of Armenia, I believed that this view in Ashtarak that we had never heard of was going to be a hard sell for someone like Setrag, who was surprisingly modest and unpretentious despite his many journeys across the globe. 

Setrag was also the definition of an extrovert. He could not stand being alone for very long. He was so extroverted that, as one of his closest friends, I felt annoyed by how he was not selective with the people he chose to hang out with. Though he had his set of close friends, he was remarkably open about who he spent time with. Whether they were materialists, nerds, aristocrats, ex-convicts, broken people or people so old that they could hardly hear anything, Setrag could, with incredible ease, spend an entire day with anyone. He was funny, witty, smart and knew six languages well. He could hold a conversation with peasants and presidents alike. He loved people, and people loved him. 

His gregariousness also caused many of his closest friends like myself a lot of irritability. He would never answer text messages, and he was always late. We all know someone who always runs late, but Setrag was on another level. He would arrive hours late to events he himself planned. In fact, when my friends and I organized our weekly intervention to deal with this problem, he would, as per tradition, light up a cigarette and calmly tell us to stop inviting him. It was Setrag after all—the life of every party. Thus, as per tradition, we would surrender to his whims. However, truth be told, this was another reason nobody wanted him to live in Ashtarak, a town outside Yerevan. Nobody wanted to see this tardiness issue further worsen. 

But, again, he was an extrovert, and I found it difficult to believe that he could live in the little town of Ashtarak. I think he himself had difficulty believing it. We assumed, like many diasporan Armenians with a touch of arrogance may assume, that Ashtarak was too far, too primitive and maybe a bit dangerous. Like many, Setrag and I steadfastly carried the dreams of the nation in our hearts—of a bigger Armenia, a more spacious Armenia, an Armenia whose borders extend from sea to shining sea. But, we knew nothing about Ashtarak—a town only 20 minutes from Yerevan’s city center. Was the water supply going to be an issue there? How often did the municipality shut the power off for repair and maintenance? Was there a stable internet connection? Setrag had already moved to Armenia—was that not enough adventure? Why did he need to live in the unfamiliar town of Ashtarak?

But Setrag, despite his scrawny build, was bestowed by God with a dauntless spirit that did not shy away from the unknown. He knew that the house was still under renovation, but since all the essentials were already installed and his parents had already spent two nights there, he believed the house was livable. He was also a good son to good parents, and thus, he decided to go see his family home to evaluate whether living there full time was a possibility. He asked me to join him, and so we went. 

I’ll admit, we went at a time that was hardly ideal. Setrag could spare a few hours out of his busy social life to finally visit his family home in the evening, at around 9 p.m., under the drizzling rain. We took a cab and left. Five minutes in, I could already see Setrag overwhelmed by every stimulus while driving on the poorly lit road surrounded by old Soviet cars and neon signs of worn out strip clubs. Since we did not know the way there, naturally, five minutes felt like an eternity—but the cab driver, with impressive consistency and without flinching, told us every few minutes that we were almost there. It was only after the sixth time he said it, that it bore any truth. When we asked him how he knew this time around, he responded that we just passed the Ashtarak town square. We thought it must have been one hell of a grand square if we did not even notice passing through it. Soon after, we started driving on a dirt road squeezed between the oldest houses in the neighborhood. The mud puddles created by the rain almost caused the car to get stuck. It was not exactly the type of reassurance that Setrag was looking for. 

With a bit of luck, however, we eventually got to our destination. We were greeted by a pile of construction sand, a single light bulb and a person who would change our lives forever—Shavarsh, the 50-year-old construction manager. We were yet to emerge from the cab, when Shavarsh greeted us with a wide smile and incredible warmth. Since I was skeptical and a bit nervous, I gave him a good firm handshake in hopes of setting the tone of this first encounter. To say that the firm handshake changed anything would be a lie. After a brief comment expressing fatherly disappointment about Setrag’s long hair, Shavarsh told him he was honored to welcome him home. 

Setrag and Shavarsh having their morning coffee.

When we stepped in the house, we were confronted with a bunch of furniture tucked away in the corner covered with bed sheets. They were placed there by Setrag’s parents to be unpacked once the renovation was completed. Shavarsh proceeded to give us the grand tour and told us about what we assumed were all the things he had finished building in the house. I say assumed, because we could hardly understand him at the time. He was loud, loquacious and spoke with the beautiful Javakhk dialect. He used a lot of construction terminology in Russian that we would not have understood even if he had said them in  English or Armenian. Whatever we understood, we understood not because of the words he used, but because he spoke with his heart and soul. He spoke to us like we were family. Even if we did not understand him, we knew he meant well. Every time Setrag asked him when a certain aspect of the construction would be completed, Shavarsh gave us a confused look, insulted that we had asked such a stupid question. He’d respond, “Tomorrow, of course. We aren’t playing around here.” They had already been working for five months, but with sheer luck, Setrag had arrived only a day before everything was to be completed. 

Setrag was never the type of person who looked for comfort or luxury, even though he could have easily obtained both wherever he wanted. In fact, he often would be happy with the bare necessities. Regardless, though, I repeatedly reminded Setrag that he could stay at my place until his family home was ready. At that stage of the renovation, even renting out a small apartment in Yerevan made more financial sense. But, my comments had the opposite effect of testing his ego. The more I insisted, the more he doubled down on wanting to spend at least a night there. Eventually, after 30 minutes of deliberations, he decided to stay the night to see whether the view his father had spoken of so highly of had any merit. 

The next day, Setrag woke up and walked out onto the balcony for the very first time. He was awestruck and mesmerized by what he saw—a view that would forever change his life and the meaningful future that it now held. The balcony faced the unparalleled crevice of the Ashtarak gorge and the dark rocky cliffs it was forged out of. On the other side was a school and a small church. At the bottom of the valley, the river Kasagh endlessly flowed, and the sound of the running water brought him a sense of tranquility like never before. In the near distance, an old, captivating pedestrian bridge stood firm and tall, extending across the gorge. It was a beautiful day. It was bright, and a graceful blue color was brushed across the edgeless sky. The soil seemed to shine, and the plants radiated fresh air after a calm night of rain. Setrag was lost for words. With a warm embrace, the land of Armenia had welcomed home one of her many wandering children.

The view Setrag woke up to on his first morning in Ashtarak.

His father, like all fathers, was right. That was all the convincing Setrag needed. Henceforth, the cosmopolitan, extroverted young Armenian, born and raised in the Holy City of Jerusalem, suddenly became one of the 5,000 residents of the town of Ashtarak. Of course, during the first few months, Setrag had to spend a lot of time making this building with four walls a home. Every day, he’d pay a visit to the local market and with a smile, dramatic gesticulations and immense patience, would explain to the store clerk what he needed. When, inevitably, they did not understand, they’d ask some other employee to come and help make sense of what Setrag was asking for. However, gradually, the house was furnished with pots, pans, towels, hangers, toothbrushes, couches, chairs, carpets, brooms, trash bins, curtains, clothes and dark coffee. Of course, it required time. One could not inorganically force a house to become a home. Plants needed years to grow. Items collected from lived experiences needed to make their way to the many corners and shelves of the house. Wine bottles needed to age and collect dust. Books needed to pile up. The picture of Ararat needed to be hung. A jar full of useless coins needed to be filled. His mom needed to bring Middle Eastern food spices. It took years, but before I knew it, in front of my eyes, the house Setrag had to take care of grew to become a house that took care of him. It had finally become home. 

The eminent dream of more than one hundred years had finally come true. Setrag and his family had a home in the homeland.

Head of the EU Delegation Ambassador Vassilis Maragos (seated left) and Deputy Foreign Minister of Armenia Paruyr Hovhannisyan (seated right) at the signing of the agreement between the Republic of Armenia and the EU on the Status of EUMA (SOMA), Nov. 20, 2023 (EUMA, X, formerly Twitter)

From November 27-29, 2023, a delegation of the European External Action Service (EEAS) and the European Commission visited Yerevan. The EU Delegation to Armenia said the purpose of the trip was to “explore possibilities to deepen and strengthen EU-Armenia relations.” Ideas were exchanged on “how to best leverage investments to address the immediate needs and enable integration of displaced Karabakh Armenians.” They agreed to “explore areas to strengthen cooperation between the EU’s Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) and Armenia” and continue dialogue on matters of security and defense, such as the EU’s promise to explore non-lethal support to the Armenian military via the European Peace Facility. The EU representatives announced their support for the “normalization of relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan based on the principles of mutual recognition of territorial integrity and inviolability of borders based on the 1991 Almaty Declaration.”

Despite the outreach of the EU to Yerevan, it is still unclear whether the EU has a clear and unified strategy or vision for the future of the South Caucasus. Do the three states in the region have any future in the EU? Is the EU aiming to replace Russia in the region? Do the Europeans have an agenda when it comes to the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace agreement? These are important questions that need to be addressed when assessing the EU’s political and economic role in the region. Despite Russia’s efforts to sideline the West following the November 10, 2020 trilateral ceasefire statement, Azerbaijani incursions in Armenia and Russia’s inability to address Armenia’s security needs pushed the latter to seek the help of new partners. It is within this context that the EU deployed a monitoring mission on the Armenia-Azerbaijan border after the September 2022 escalation, thus becoming a peace facilitator in the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict and a proactive player in the region. European think tanks started addressing some of these questions and proposing certain recommendations. In this article, I will highlight two important publications and summarize their recommendations related to Armenia and the region.

Objectives the EU should pursue in the South Caucasus

In March 2023, the Netherlands Institute for International Relations published a report titled, “The EU in the South Caucasus: Navigating a geopolitical labyrinth in turmoil.” The report argued that the EU should “develop and implement a more holistic strategic vision, both for the region and for its relations with the individual countries.” To fulfill this strategic vision, the report proposes that the EU adopt four parallel objectives that it should pursue in the South Caucasus: (1) exporting European values on good governance, democracy and human rights; (2) promoting regional stability and security; (3) expanding security, energy and trade interests; and (4) containing or even pushing back Russian influence. 

The report mentions that certain obstacles may arise in fulfilling these objectives. First, Moscow, although its “credibility as a security provider and its popularity in Armenia have shriveled,” tries to push the EU and the West out of any peace settlement process. Second, the issue of the establishment of a transport connection between Azerbaijan and its exclave Nakhichevan raises security concerns for Armenia, as Baku demands an extraterritorial corridor. A third obstacle is the demarcation and delimitation of the Armenian-Azerbaijani border and the withdrawal of Azerbaijani troops from Armenia’s sovereign territory. Finally, there is the issue of the rights and the future of the Armenians of Artsakh, which is no longer a priority for Yerevan, Moscow and the West after Azerbaijan engaged in a military operation that forced the Artsakh leadership to capitulate and the population to flee to Armenia, fearing massacre.

On the geopolitical role of the EU, the report mentions several recommendations:

• The EU should have a clear focus on the security dimension as well as the (geo)political, economic and normative dimensions of the region and strengthen its presence in the three countries.
• The EU should continue to “invest in both the construction and security of transport and energy connection.” Within this context, the “Middle Corridor” is mentioned as an important transit route connecting the Caspian Sea via Azerbaijani and Georgia to Turkey and Europe, increasing trade between China, Central Asia and Europe. Certain concerns were raised that Russia would engage in sabotage activities against this route. 
• The EU should avoid “both-sideism,” deter Azerbaijani efforts to impose a peace treaty on Armenia under military pressure and demand the withdrawal of Azerbaijani troops from Armenian territory. 
• The EU should ensure that “Armenia duly implements the commitments it has undertaken regarding the transport connection from Azerbaijan proper to Nakhichevan.” The report mentions that the EU has an interest in its realization, not only because it unlocks the communication transport channels between Yerevan and Baku, but also because it would strengthen the Middle Corridor trade and lead to a normalization process between Ankara and Yerevan, thus opening their shared border.
• The EU Mission in Armenia (EUMA) should be “endowed with sufficient resources and flexibility to fulfill its mandate.” The EU should make clear to Baku that the EUMA is an essential part of the peace process and encourage Baku to not only accept but also cooperate with the Mission, ideally “by allowing it to have access to the Azerbaijani side of the border.”
• When it comes to Artsakh, the paper recommended that the EU should press Baku to offer a credible and internationally monitored arrangement to the Armenians of the region, aiming to guarantee their rights and security within the context of “minority rights.” (The paper was published months before the September 2023 escalation and depopulation of the Armenians of Artsakh.)
• Finally, the report recommends that the EU should make a long-term investment in Armenia and engage in structural reforms to strengthen its democratic institutions and resilience. The report recognizes that in the short-term, Yerevan’s political and economic dependence will not decrease, and the EU must “manage Armenian expectations in this regard,” but it “can and should play a long game here (in the region).”

Three ways the EU can strengthen Armenia’s resilience

In November 2023, the European Council on Foreign Relations published “After Nagorno-Karabakh: How Europeans can strengthen Armenia’s resilience.” Marie Dumoulin and Gustav Gressel argue that even though Azerbaijan has captured Artsakh, security concerns in the South Caucasus are far from over, as Azerbaijan continues to push irredentist claims over Armenia. The authors say that the establishment of a land corridor through Armenia’s Syunik province, whether under the control of Russia or Azerbaijan, poses significant risks for Europe, as Ankara and Baku, with the support of Moscow, would control all the transit routes connecting Europe to Central Asia and China. To mitigate this threat, they suggest three ways that the EU can strengthen Armenia’s resilience. 

The first suggestion is that the EU should prevent further military escalations between Armenia and Azerbaijan. For this purpose, the EU should engage in high-level political engagement with Yerevan to show that it cares about Armenia. At the same time, it should engage with Ankara and Baku to minimize tensions and warn the Azerbaijani government that any possible attack would have consequences. To consolidate its active role in the region, the EUMA should extend its mandate and be equipped with the tools to better detect ceasefire violations. The authors welcomed the decision of the EU Foreign Affairs Council in November 2023 to increase the number of monitors.  

The second suggestion is to strengthen Armenia’s defense capabilities. The authors suggest that the EU should be open to using the European Peace Facility (an off-budget instrument to enhance the EU’s ability to prevent conflicts and build peace and security) to equip the Armenian army. It is important to engage with Georgia to facilitate the arms flow to Armenia. EU member states can also assist Yerevan in engaging in military reforms in the sectors of military logistics, training and education. Finally, engagement in strategic consultation with India and other partners is important to provide heavy arms to Armenia so that the latter can withstand future Azerbaijani attacks. 

Finally, the EU must support a peace settlement between Armenia and Azerbaijan. The authors argue that since Artsakh is no longer a part of the negotiations, “mediation should aim for an agreement on the delimitation and opening of borders,” including the Armenia-Turkey border. Regarding a transit route connecting Azerbaijan and Nakhichevan, the report concludes that as part of the future peace plan, the EU should offer investment opportunities and technical support to facilitate transit and connectivity. The authors say that the issue of Artsakh is “lost but suggest that the EU provide humanitarian aid to the Armenian refugees and help their “integration” into the Armenian society, to “ensure future domestic political stability in the medium and long term,” thus closing the issue of the right of return of Armenians of Artsakh. 

Importantly, the article says that the EU needs to convince the “Armenians not to have too many expectations, and Europe must refrain from making unachievable promises,” adding that the EU cannot “make Iran, Russia, Turkey and Azerbaijan go away—nor will it completely replace them.” Yet the EU can support Armenia to balance its interests without making painful compromises and prevent it from being fully dependent on a single regional power. 

To sum up, the recent publications and academic debates show that the EU is an active player in the South Caucasus. While the EU aims to minimize Russia’s influence in the region, the EU will not be able to replace Russia in the near future by exercising soft power (such as economic incentives or mediation), as long as it does not deploy leverage to push Baku to sign a peace treaty with Yerevan. For the EU, the issue of Artsakh, which was seen as one of the main obstacles to signing a peace treaty, is resolved. Following the loss of Artsakh, the EU is pressuring Baku to fulfill its obligations and accept the EU’s role in the region as a key mediating player. The question is to what extent the EU’s strategy will work, amid the exclusion of other key regional actors such as Turkey and Iran. The geography and cultures of the South Caucasus are unique compared to other conflicts in Europe’s neighborhood, such as in Eastern Europe. Policymakers must be aware that the South Caucasus is bordered by Iran, Turkey and Russia, and extra-regional actors such as China and India also have a share in this competition and in shaping the regional dynamics. Hence, for a stable and secure region, any peace process must be holistic, realistic and proportionally acceptable to the key actors.

It is a topic that consumes many of our church leaders globally, nationally and locally. Many of us lie awake some nights searching for the answer—how do we stop the obvious decline of many of our parishes? Each region of the Armenian nation has a different experience. The challenges in Armenia are generally associated with the impact of 70 years of Soviet rule, when the church was marginally tolerated but unable to provide public leadership. In the diaspora, we tend to attribute the decline of our parishes to the external impact of secularism and assimilation. The former has created a material society, at its worst obsessed with progress in a Godless state. Our children are separated from God in their daily lives, except in their family life. It is a struggle between two distinct worlds on this earth. Assimilation is associated with a separation from one’s Armenian roots, either by choice or due to the environment. These are real challenges and one of the reasons I advocate for a decentralized administration of our church hierarchy. Specific dioceses should be empowered to make adjustments to address the impact of these problems in a given locale. Unfortunately, our church remains a one-size-fits-all institution, and we suffer the consequences. 

Many Armenians blame intermarriage as a contributor to our decline. My perspective is that intermarriage, in and of itself, is not a direct contributor, because identity in the diaspora is a choice. Certainly, it adds complexity to the challenge, but a welcoming church that understands the implications of intermarriage can function with success. We have yet to address this matter in a meaningful way, other than encouraging the Armenian spouse to bring their non-Armenian partner to church. This reflects a lack of understanding of how to fulfill needs and build identity. Intermarriage is a sociological reflection of ethnic cultures two-three generations removed and should be embraced, not ignored.

Our parishes were built as a result of migration patterns. The first wave that built most of the churches in America was a direct reflection of the early 20th century immigration to these shores. Large communities such as the New York metro, Philadelphia, Boston, Detroit, Los Angeles and Fresno were established by the survivor generation from the Armenian Genocide. Other communities were built in places such as Indian Orchard, St. Louis, Chicago, Worcester, Syracuse and Niagara Falls by the same generation, reflecting employment patterns. It’s how Armenians built a presence in tiny Whitinsville, Massachusetts. The second wave of church construction reflected migration from within the U.S. and other countries to places such as Texas, Florida, Minnesota and other states not traditionally associated with Armenian communities. Many of these communities started as mission parishes and evolved into permanent faith communities. As a direct result of the church division, a duplication of parishes occurred in many legacy communities. Prior to the tangible impact of assimilation, these redundancies were tolerated, and a dedicated core of parishioners supported these churches. 

The impact of population shifts and assimilation, or at least estrangement from the church, has displayed a new reality in some areas. The small communities with a limited population base are most heavily impacted. Parishes in communities such as Niagara Falls, Syracuse (where the Prelacy church closed), Albany, Springfield and New Britain are experiencing visible evidence of decline, as the number of the faithful is limited relative to the number of parishes to support. This is a painful and difficult process for the hundreds of dedicated people who have devoted their lives to the Armenian church yet feel powerless as they witness this slow decline. We should feel compassion for the remarkable people of these communities who are trying to manage a situation out of their control. Yet the larger communities are not exempt from this decline. While the population base of Armenians serving many regions has increased, the number of children in Sunday School has declined, as well as church attendees. If you look at attendance relative to the population increases, the decline is even more significant. The difference?

Large communities can mask the problem better by sheer volume, as immigration from the Middle East and Armenia has replenished losses. In a small community of 75 families, the absence of 50-percent can be devastating and impact the services offered. In a large community of 700 families, 50-percent participation will still allow the critical mass to reasonably fill the church and have a functioning Sunday School and activities. This is not a criticism. We are all on this journey together.

The Consecration of Saint Stephen Armenian Apostolic Church (named after the first Christian martyr) Tremont Street, New Britain, Connecticut, May 1926 (Project SAVE Photo Archives)

It may be of value to discuss one example in more depth. St. Stephen’s parish in New Britain, CT is one of the oldest parishes in America, with its consecration in 1926. Prior to 1933, it was the only parish in New Britain. As a result of the schism, the Holy Resurrection parish was formed nearby and later built a beautiful facility on Stanley St. As is quite common in our complex relationships, you either went to the “Tremont St.” or “Stanley St.” St. Stephen’s was one of the unaffiliated parishes from 1933-56 and joined the Prelacy at its formation. Unfortunately, St. Stephen’s has experienced several communal challenges, resulting in a loss of parishioners. 

Facing the common issues of indifference and secularism, the parish today is held together by a few very dedicated servants of the church. Their story is not unusual, but if you live there it feels unique. I feel for the painful experiences of those remaining. They are all good people who have done what they believe is right. Some of the parishioners now attend Holy Resurrection, which is led by the dynamic young Rev. Fr. Haroutiun Sabounjian. I am thankful that they have chosen to continue in the Armenian church rather than join many in almost every community who simply drift away. This parish is more than an example of our challenge. It is also very personal. My grandfather Takvor Harotian was a charter founder of the church, and many of my relatives, particularly the Kevorkian family, served there for many decades. My mother was raised in that parish, and I remember many Sundays attending Badarak holding the hand of my dear grandfather. It will always be a special place. Ironically, after years of separation, relations between the Prelacy and Diocesan parishes in New Britain have never been better. At least, the faithful have a feeling of camaraderie that has been missing for so long in our churches. Intellectually, we may understand that two churches in a small community is not a natural state, but the decline of any parish is painful.

The current status of our churches begs the question—is it a lack of funding, or is it a lack of faithful? I am reminded of what a mentor of mine in the church told me many years ago. Our parish at that time was suffering from a financial deficit, and the board of trustees, the parish council, was debating options. This individual stated that if we are doing the work of God, we will never have a budget deficit. His point was, of course, that money is needed, but it comes more naturally when people are in a faith community and give from their heart. As we began to focus on the church’s work, our deficit disappeared. I learned something as a young man from that experience.

 It taught me that the most important area of focus in maintaining an Armenian Christian community is sustainable communal relationships. This is why our Lord created His church. We don’t go to a parish for the bazaar and picnics. They are instruments to sustain our parishes and vehicles for bonding. What we have in common is our belief in our savior Jesus Christ, according to the traditions of the Armenian church. If that is true, how we treat, greet and support each other will make the key difference. If our churches are focused only on fundraising rather than Christian outreach, we will fail. When a parish is symptomatically in decline, the causes can be traced to early on. Unresolved conflicts or drifting from the true mission of the church seem benign in the moment but erode the church foundation over time.

Everywhere in this country there are humble and dedicated faithful doing their utmost to carry out the mission of the church. We should pray for their wisdom and strength to keep the focus on Armenian Christian relationships. The Soorp Badarak is replenishing and nurturing for our souls, but too often we attend out of stressful obligation as we seek that nourishment. I don’t think St. Stephen’s has a financial problem, but rather is seeking the faithful. Many parishes can recover from decline if they focus on building a community of Armenian faith. Some will not. We don’t know what the future will bring but pray for the people of St. Stephen’s and all parishes struggling with sustainability. We have many wonderful stories of revitalization when parishes find the right leadership and attract new parishioners. It can happen anywhere. This is the power of prayer and understanding why we have parishes. We need not fear change but rather stagnation from a lack of change. It is my hope that we can apply this approach to wherever we call home. Encourage others to discover God in their lives and the joy of a Christian Armenian identity. Don’t focus on money. Share your passion of belonging to a Christian community. When their hearts are filled, the funding will appear. This is a lesson we can all learn from our ancestors. They built these communities with little education, limited funds but extraordinary faith. Today, as a result of their gifts, we are generally well educated, considered wealthy yet are challenged in faith as a community. Are our lives truly better? There is no need to eliminate what we have earned—simply apply it towards a deep and eternal foundation. 

ARS members and volunteers preparing packages of essential goods for the forcibly displaced Armenians of Artsakh

The Armenian Relief Society (ARS) has consistently taken a lead role in supporting our brothers and sisters in Artsakh since the early days of the Liberation War. The organization’s commitment is evident through various humanitarian programs, the establishment of kindergartens and ongoing assistance efforts. Demonstrating unwavering dedication to the wellbeing of the Armenians of Artsakh, the ARS remains steadfast in addressing the current adversities faced by our Artsakh brethren.

Following the cruel attack on Artsakh on September 19, 2023, the Armenian Relief Society, alongside its global entities, swiftly responded to the critical situation by providing essential financial and moral support. This includes the distribution of over 1,500 boxes of food and essential needs.

In the initial aid phase:

• 440 boxes were distributed to Artsakh compatriots from funds provided by ARS Australia.
• Over 100 boxes were dispatched to Goris for distribution to the displaced people of Artsakh seeking refuge across the Armenian border.
• In collaboration with sister organizations (Homenetmen, Hamazkayin, ARF and AYF) and aided by volunteers from various countries, ARS packaged and distributed 1,000 boxes to Artsakh compatriots settling in different regions of Armenia, including Yerevan, Aragatsotn, Armavir, Ararat, Shirak, Lori, Gegharkunik, Tavush, Syunik, Kotayk and Vayots Dzor.

Some of the items gathered for the displaced people of Artsakh

The ARS Armenia office received generous donations of food, clothing, bedding and kitchen utensils from kindhearted donors to benefit Artsakh compatriots.

Initiating the second phase on November 18, 2023, the ARS continued distributing additional boxes of food and essential needs to the displaced people of Artsakh, with the support of dedicated ARS and AYF members. The “We Are Our Mountains” Foundation contributed significantly to this phase by providing 20,000 tons of pasta.

To date, the ARS has successfully distributed more than 7,000 boxes (each containing $100 worth of food and essential needs), aiding over 30,000 people of Artsakh. The commitment persists as the Armenian Relief Society plans to adopt new long-term and permanent projects in support of our brothers and sisters in Artsakh.

Armenian-Azerbaijani prisoner exchange (Photo: Screen grab from Azatutyun, )

YEREVAN— Following an agreement made on October 7 between the governments of Armenia and Azerbaijan, the exchange of Armenian and Azerbaijani prisoners of war took place today on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border, in the region of Ijevan and Kazakh.

The offices of the Armenian Prime Minister and the Azerbaijani President released a joint statement announcing the mutual release of detainees, with Baku freeing 32 Armenian servicemen and Yerevan releasing two Azerbaijani servicemen. The timing coincided with the visit of U.S. Deputy Secretary of State James O’Brien to Baku. While it was considered a positive step by several countries, the announcement was seen as a result of direct negotiations between the two countries.

According to information shared by the Azerbaijani APA agency, Armenian nationals who were captive in Azerbaijan were detained during a supposed “counter-terrorism operation” in the Hadrut region of Artsakh in December 2020, a month after the end of the 2020 Artsakh War. The remaining six individuals were apprehended at various border points.

Human rights advocate Siranush Sahakyan has reported that, according to official data, Azerbaijan still holds 55 Armenians, including 41 prisoners of war, eight former Artsakh leaders and six civilians. She added that there is unofficial data regarding at least 80 prisoners of war and civilians held without investigations into their statuses.

The joint statement states that Armenia and Azerbaijan mutually acknowledge a “historical chance to achieve a long-awaited peace in the region.” Both nations reiterated their commitment to normalizing relations and forging a peace treaty based on principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity. After deliberations between the Armenia’s prime minister’s office and the president’s administration of Azerbaijan, an agreement was reached to take “tangible steps towards building confidence between the two countries,” the statement declared.

Furthermore, the Armenian administration expressed support for Azerbaijan’s bid to host the 29th Session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP29), withdrawing its own candidacy. Azerbaijan reciprocated by supporting Armenia’s candidacy for membership in the COP Bureau of the Eastern European Group.

Both countries anticipate further discussions to implement trust-building measures in the near future. They “call on the international community to support their efforts that will contribute to building mutual trust between two countries and will positively impact the entire South Caucasus region.”

However, concerns have arisen regarding the sincerity of such commitments. This skepticism arose due to the recent sentencing of Gagik Voskanyan, who was handed an 18-year prison term by a court in Baku following the announcement of the return of POWs. Voskanyan was part of the group of Armenian prisoners repatriated today.

Voskanyan faced a range of charges, including terrorism, arms smuggling and illegal border crossing, among other alleged offenses. Many observers believe the case against him to be fabricated. Throughout the legal proceedings, Voskanyan vehemently maintained his innocence.

The incident involving Voskanyan captured global attention after Armenia’s Ministry of Defense released a video on August 16, 2023. The footage depicted Azerbaijani Armed Forces soldiers engaging with Voskanyan, subsequently arresting him and escorting him to an undisclosed location. This incident and the fact that former state and military officials of Artsakh continue to be detained in Baku raise doubts about Azerbaijan’s commitment to the promised release of prisoners of war.

The “historic opportunity to achieve long-awaited peace in the region” asserted in the joint statement has been critically dissected by analysts, emphasizing the ongoing series of aggressive actions against Armenia, including recent fatalities at the border. Additionally, the statement reaffirmed intentions to establish a peace treaty based on principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity. Yet, recent remarks by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev regarding access to exclave Nakhichevan through Armenia raise questions about Azerbaijan’s readiness to respect Armenia’s sovereignty, particularly as it pertains to border controls and customs.

Aliyev initially promised to exchange prisoners on November 9, in order to portray the potential success of direct negotiations. Azerbaijan has recently declined to participate in meetings mediated by the West, instead insisting on direct talks with Armenia. This shift towards direct negotiations has sidelined established international mediators and threatened Armenia’s position. Yerevan-based analyst Tigran Grigoryan argued that Armenian PM Nikol Pashinyan, through engaging in these direct talks, might be pressured into further concessions without effective oversight or accountability.

Despite this development, intermediary efforts have still been in play. The EU Eastern Partnership Foreign Ministers’ Conference in Brussels on December 11-12 indicated the potential meeting of Armenian and Azerbaijani ministers, though no separate talks have been announced.

In a recent announcement, Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov expressed Baku’s expectation of mutual sincerity and commitment from Armenia, stressing the significance of maintaining peace and neighborly relations without falling victim to short-term geopolitical maneuvers. 

“Peace and neighborly relations should not be sacrificed to some short-sighted geopolitical speculation,” Bayramov stated, underlining the necessity for collective efforts akin to the European model. Bayramov urged for mutual tolerance from Armenia and called upon EU member states to support the peace process without causing any disruptions.

This statement seems to echo the recent joint declaration between the governments of Armenia and Azerbaijan, emphasizing bilateral negotiations. Such an approach appears aimed at facilitating Azerbaijani interests within the realm of negotiations with the government of Armenia, according to Haykakan Alik.

Key global stakeholders have weighed in on the joint statement made by the leaders of both nations, expressing views on the release of detainees and the prospects for peace in the South Caucasus.

Turkey’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs stressed the urgency of signing an early peace treaty between Azerbaijan and Armenia, emphasizing its potential as a pivotal step towards sustainable peace and stability in the region.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Maria Zakharova, conveyed Moscow’s welcome of the mutual agreement between Armenia and Azerbaijan to normalize relations and sign a peace treaty. Zakharova commended the release of prisoners and the concrete support extended by both Yerevan and Baku in international organizations.

The U.S. State Department lauded the joint statement by Pashinyan and Aliyev. The United States emphasized the significance of the commitment made by both parties, highlighting it as a crucial confidence-building measure, pivotal for the forthcoming peace agreement and normalization of relations.

EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Josep Borrell echoed the sentiment of a historic opportunity for peace in the region. He reaffirmed the EU’s dedication to supporting the ongoing efforts. Borrell emphasized the joint statement’s pivotal nature, considering it a substantial political step forward.

Javier Colomina, NATO Secretary General’s Special Representative in the Caucasus and Central Asia, welcomed the mutual release of detainees and other confidence-building measures declared in the joint statement by Armenia and Azerbaijan. Colomina underscored NATO’s firm backing for these efforts, emphasizing support for the normalization of relations between the two nations.

YEREVAN—The American University of Armenia (AUA), in partnership with Washington State University (WSU), has signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to establish a Center for Excellence in Journalism and create a new master’s program in journalism education. The $1.3 million, four-year university partnership initiative is funded by the U.S. Embassy in Yerevan to support Armenia’s media sector.

Through the U.S. Embassy’s support, 90-percent tuition scholarship will be provided to approximately nine graduate students per year to study in the Master’s in Journalism degree program, with a select number of students also having the opportunity to compete for a summer internship in the United States, where they will acquire hands-on reporting skills in a U.S. media outlet.

“We are proud and grateful to be the recipient of this important grant from the U.S. Embassy,” said AUA President Dr. Bruce Boghosian. “Since the University’s inception, the U.S. government and USAID/ASHA have supported the American University of Armenia in various ways, and this marks another milestone in our longstanding relationship. We look forward to working alongside our colleagues at WSU to implement this project and eventually launch a Master’s in Journalism degree program. We are convinced that this new program will be of great benefit to Armenia and the region at large.” 

The Center for Excellence in Journalism will serve as a hub for journalism education and leadership in research, training, best practices and collaboration with leading experts and policymakers that advances knowledge of how quality journalism can serve as a bulwark against misinformation and improve networking within Armenia’s journalism ecosystem. The Center will also offer professional development programs serving the wider media community.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State in the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Rafik Mansour traveled to Armenia to inaugurate the new university partnership. U.S. Ambassador to Armenia Kristina Kvien, as well as Minister of Education, Science, Culture and Sport Zhanna Andreasyan, also attended the launch event.

“This U.S.-Armenia relationship is based on shared values, including press freedom and the critical role of education in building a strong, democratic society that is resilient to disinformation,” said Deputy Assistant Secretary Mansour at the inauguration event. “The United States is proud to invest in this university partnership initiative, which will support Armenia’s democratic development and invest in the next generation of journalists.” 

“This project aims to support current and future journalists with the knowledge and skills to have a positive impact on the journalism sector in Armenia and beyond,” says Dr. Hagop Yacoubian, dean of the AUA College of Humanities and Social Sciences (CHSS). “The project will contribute to further diversifying the academic portfolio of CHSS and thus providing new possibilities for us as we prepare students to become civic and professional leaders.”

“We are delighted to formally establish this flagship partnership in journalism education between AUA and WSU,” said Dr. Lawrence Pintak, professor of communications at Washington State University. “This program represents a new milestone in the development of Armenia’s media sector and will support the professional development of Armenia’s journalism community for years to come.”

In addition to this program, the U.S. Embassy in Yerevan also announced an award to AUA to implement a two-year English program for journalists aimed at equipping the participants with English-language skills through courses tailored to their professional needs.

The event was live-streamed through the AUA Media Lab.