Varak Ghazarian with students in the school in Askeran, Artsakh in 2018

What a year it has been. What a chaotic past three years. I feel like I am finally recovering from all the trauma, and, wow, there was a lot of trauma. It has been a world of pain, and I found myself struggling to differentiate between new wounds and those from the past, a disorienting combination that became a recipe for disaster. I tried to breathe while drowning, but every time I tried to resurface and catch a breath, I kept getting pulled down into newfound depths. Last year, I reached the depth of depths with the handover of Artsakh. It had been a whole year of struggling with the blockade, feeling useless, going insane and preparing mentally for war, a war that never came. Rather, simply, genocide – the worst possible outcome I had never imagined occurred. I was worried for my friends. I was worried for everyone in Artsakh. I felt trapped and useless yet again. The place I call heaven became unreachable for my brothers, sisters and me. I accepted this fact immediately and fell into the depths of my sadness and grief. I tried keeping myself as busy as possible to not go completely insane from the terrors of this world. 

The worst part was walking around Yerevan as if nothing had happened, as school and work continued. Life did not take a pause to grieve for the genocide of 100,000 Armenians collectively. I was furious at the government, my university and all the people in the cafes and restaurants. The anger was driving me crazy. How could people be so careless toward their brothers and sisters who had lost everything? I saw a considerable amount of people working to ensure the Artsakhtsis some sort of future, but we as a whole seemed not to care about what just happened. I felt like Komitas, who went mad walking through Etchmiadzin after the Genocide, due to the carelessness of his people.

Not a single day to grieve. And here we are, three months later, celebrating the holidays as if nothing happened. “No Varak, life must go on. We must continue with our lives and persist. We cannot grieve now,” people tell me. I am sorry, but we must grieve in order to move forward in a healthy manner and to respect all the lives that were affected by the genocide. We must grieve in order to learn from our past and create a better tomorrow, one that ensures such tragedy does not occur again, and never again truly means never again. 

A wise man compared the current moment in Armenian history to a donkey whose colt was slaughtered. He said that the very next day that same donkey would go on with his life, continuing to graze as if nothing had happened. That is what is currently happening, sadly. How are we any different than that donkey? People are told to carry on and be strong, but that makes us exactly like the donkey. 

When we actually grieve and think about what has happened, only then will we become the humans we like to think we are. If we do not stop history from repeating itself, we will live a vicious cycle like that donkey. It is time to stop, reflect, grieve and then move forward. I have grieved and feel like I am still in the process, but I will allow that process to flow naturally and not resist it. I have realized what is important to me and the value of gratitude. We must be grateful for what we have today, for we may not have it tomorrow. That gratitude has driven me to work ever more diligently to actualize my goals to create a stronger and more beautiful Armenia—an Armenia that holds on firmly to its traditions, its culture and its people. The future does not seem bright, the work seems insurmountable and the time does not seem sufficient, but I am fully committed. Are you?

Ruth Thomasian (Project Save), retired Principal Hoory Boyamian & St. Stephen’s Armenian Elementary School students on Armenian Culture Day, 2018

The long directed crusade toward preserving and perpetuating our ethnic heritage has seen its peaks and valleys, to be sure, but its strength lies in its continued existence. The debate still continues whether Armenians in the Diaspora can preserve their ethnic existence. As always, there are two sides to this issue. Some say they cannot; others say they can.

Granted, the future of the Armenian Diaspora is uncertain, and the struggle is extremely difficult. But we should never be hopeless. If Diaspora Armenians were able to survive, despite their losses, hundreds of years away from their fatherland, there is still hope that they will be able to do so in the future, provided that they do not lose their will and determination to preserve and perpetuate their culture and heritage.

We all know the importance of a nation’s culture and heritage. They give us a real sense of roots and belonging, as well as knowledge and wisdom, without which a nation becomes unrelated to the present. It is culture and heritage that offer a sense of identity and hold us together as an ethnic group and as a nation.

We, the Armenian people, can learn from our heritage, appreciate its historic values and develop the ability to build upon them. We cannot, however, build a sound and strong present and future without those values inherited from the past.

A tremendous challenge lies before Diasporas Armenians. The great task at hand is to protect what is bequeathed to us from our ancestors. The abdication of this responsibility is unforgivable. If we believe we are the inheritors of a glorious, 3,000-year-old culture, we should actively commit ourselves to ensuring its survival, which, in turn, will ensure our own survival. With a reaffirmation of will, determination, faith and fortitude, the safekeeping of the Armenian heritage will be a certainty. But where is one to begin?

1. One of the most effective ways to preserve and perpetuate the Armenian heritage is the Armenian school. The Armenian school is one of the strongest tools in transmitting our culture. Armenian language and history are vital arteries connecting us to our roots. They are important depositories and powerful conveyors of our ethnic values. 

The Armenian school is destined to be the most potent force to help light the path for future generations of Armenians. It is a powerful weapon to fight against assimilation.

1. Another powerful tool to preserve and perpetuate the Armenian heritage is the media. Television, radio and press carry a potential in this realm that one cannot afford to ignore. Radio and television time, in particular, is readily available, and even now is being utilized to present many fine programs of an ethnic nature. The Armenian press, along with other media, also plays a very important role in our public life. It serves the public, provides information and offers guidance. It is also called on to act as a public conscience. 

Furthermore, the Armenian press is a link between the Diaspora and Mother Armenia. It is a potent medium to educate the public on Armenian matters.

1. A third arm of defense to preserve and perpetuate the Armenian heritage is the Armenian church. The Armenian church, consisting of the Apostolic, Catholic and Evangelical branches, is the bedrock of our nation, the front of our ethno-national identity in the Diaspora. Without it, we are spiritually and, to a considerable extent, culturally impoverished people. The church can provide our people with the God-given strength to love one another and to glory in each other’s presence. 

Undoubtedly, the Armenian churches try to uphold the spiritual identity of our people. They are the institutions that have tried to protect the best of our spiritual heritage and to advance the noblest ideas of humankind.

1. A fourth powerful factor to preserve and perpetuate the Armenian heritage is the Armenian organizations. This entity comprises political, cultural, benevolent, compatriotic and athletic groups. These organizations are dedicated to promoting Armenian heritage. They have tremendous potential to assist the new generations of Armenians through their multitude of programs. 

The Armenian organizations are the strong and staunch advocates of Armenianism. They champion Armenian language, history and culture. They continue to espouse Armenian rights and to keep the Armenian Cause alive. They organize, supervise and motivate Armenians to attend Armenian affairs and encourage them to get involved. Separately and corporately, they try to improve the lot of Diaspora Armenians.

1. A fifth important and effective tool to preserve and perpetuate the Armenian heritage is the Armenian home. The foundation for ethnic consciousness begins at home. Without the help of the Armenian home, the efforts of organizations to inculcate pride in our heritage in our younger generations will be a difficult task. 

One of the major thrusts of transmitting the Armenian identity at home is the value system. How do children learn and develop Armenian cultural values? Children fashion their value system mainly during childhood. One of the most important ingredients, then, is the parents. 

Similarly, one of the most important classrooms is the home, and the parental dimension is extremely decisive in effective Armenian education. If Diaspora Armenians are to raise children who are proud of their national, ethnic and cultural values, they have to fulfill their responsibilities as Armenian parents by creating a conducive atmosphere where their children are exposed to, appreciative of, and taught the Armenian language, history, music, art and other expressions of their culture.

Can Armenians live in Diasporan pluralistic societies, interact freely and openly and still retain their Armenian identity? Yes, they can, provided that they make a personal commitment to a bicultural way of life. This has to be an emotionally as well as intellectually felt act of will, to remain true to their Armenian roots under all circumstances, as in marriage, for better or for worse.

For the past few months, I have had the great privilege of working through the collection of over 3,500 photographs in the archives of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF).

The photographs have been meticulously scanned and thoroughly cataloged already by some colleagues. My job has been to go through the list, fix or fine-tune whatever needs an extra pair of eyes – at times involving some engaging and surprising supplementary research – and upload the images onto the photographs section of the website. Some finishing touches have often been further supplied by more colleagues still. It is a real team effort.

Now that we are past the 1,500 mark of uploaded photographs, I have put together a few brief articles for the pages of the Weekly highlighting some themes and takeaways from the collection. This venerable newspaper has shared insights from the ARF Archives on more than one occasion in recent years. Beyond anything else, I would like to invite readers to have a look at the images for themselves at arfarchives.org/photograph. Maybe you will find a great illustration for a report, a fun tidbit to share with family and friends, or a familiar face or two – relatives or ancestors, perhaps?

To start with, it is worth asking: just what is an archive, anyway? What gets to be called an archive – as opposed to, say, a scrapbook? How are archives even made?

The term “archive” can be quite broad. It comes to English via French and Latin, ultimately from the Greek arkhe, meaning “beginning” or “first,” the same root for “archeology.” That is also the same root possibly shared with the Armenian arka [arkay], meaning “king.” In Armenian itself, the word: bahots [պահոց] could be used to mean an archive – suggesting a place for storage. Another word is tivan [դիւան], which is more associated with courtly, official record-keeping. 

All of the above suggest a systematic documentation of materials – so, maybe indeed like a scrapbook, but much bigger, covering a longer period of time and including information and objects that have probably had some measurable impact on society. Official archives have public significance, after all – history worth preserving and sharing. The archives of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation are now in the process of being made more and more accessible for that very reason.

At the same time, how archives are compiled requires judgment and pointed effort. Getting up to the level of “systematic documentation” can be tricky, costly and time-consuming. In addition, some items never get preserved or get lost along the way, for all sorts of reasons (wars, natural disasters, conspiracies, carelessness…). For scholars studying the origins of government and statehood, the spread of bureaucracies serves as a strong indicator of the organized regulation of public life. Their activities tend to be especially directed towards conscription and taxation – controlling armies and money have long been the most important characteristics of governments. The establishment of archives forms part of such processes.

However, if there ever were a nation that could not claim a regular, stable political path, it would be the Armenians. And so it comes to pass that the ARF Archives present, in fact, a motley and not-necessarily-systematic collection of materials, whatever has managed to survive. In one of his very last public lectures – delivered at Soorp Khatch Church in the Washington, D.C. area in May 2023 – the late Prof. Richard Hovannisian recounted how he first came across the boxes of documents pertaining to the Republic of Armenia in Boston covered by a thick layer of dust. That was probably sometime in the 1950s or 1960s. The record-keeping of the young republic of 1918 is certainly included in the ARF Archives – to whatever extent possible given the upheavals of 1918-1921. Papers from the ARF as a political organization are likewise there. The photographs, for their part, stretch from the era at the beginning (arkhe!) of the Federation of Armenian Revolutionaries (as it was first called) of the late 19th century, all the way up to the 1970s, possibly later still.

One reason why it is important to share the photographs far and wide is the first theme from the collection that would strike anyone clicking through the website – a lot of unknowns. Many of the posts are entitled “Unknown Man” or “Unknown Group.” One of my favorite parts of the job is deciphering the handwriting that appears on the back of many photographs. Sometimes it is quite clear. Other times, a few good guesses need to be thrown in with accompanying question marks. And then, very often, there is no information at all accompanying the pictures. But they still need to be shared. So they go on the website as an “unknown.” I hope that someone somewhere will recognize the subject or the event and eventually chime in.

My colleagues and I recognize these imperfections in the archives. We also acknowledge our own limitations in the way we document and share them. Library science and database management are well-established disciplines and practices. We are doing our best with the chief aim of opening up the materials at the ARF Archives to the public. In future, we hope to be able to preserve and present these materials even more professionally, with more detailed records. Right now, we intend for the website to serve as a tool and resource for a broad audience.

(The ARF Archives is glad to hear even now from scholars and researchers, if anyone wishes to make a specific project proposal for a closer look and first-hand access to materials, depending on their availability.)

For my own part, I can say that, for example, choosing to transliterate between Western Armenian and Eastern Armenian pronunciation standards has been challenging when putting up the materials in English. Publishing information in the original Armenian would also be worthwhile at some point down the line. That is just one detail that comes to mind as I sift through episodes of history and understand my own responsibility in shaping how generations to come will perceive generations past. That is another impact archives have, directly or indirectly.

In the meantime, going through the collection is like unwrapping a Christmas present with every click. You never know what’s going to happen, who’s going to show up next! We Armenians already get two Christmases every year. People working on archives evidently get multiple Christmases a day.

In future glimpses into the ARF photo archives, I shall curate some images from the collection – many of them thought-provoking, some surprising, at times funny and always interesting. They form a part of our collective story and now give us the chance to form a fuller picture of our past.

This article is the first in a four-part series on the making of Encounters and Convergences: A Book of Ideas and Art by Seta B. Dadoyan.

An amalgam of philosophy and art, the opus is conceived and composed as an oeuvre. It is a statement about my scholarship and art, and the commonalities between them. My basic argument is that all meaningful writings and artworks are essentially responses to circumstances. Understanding and reflecting human “situatedness” (in Heidegger’s term) are their motive and objective. Situatedness means the interconnectedness of perceptions, reactions, social-historical experiences and circumstances. It implies the social embeddedness of both literature and arts as contexts for encounters and convergences between writers, artists and their worlds. While encounters mean confrontations and dynamic relationships with everything, convergences are meetings and the generation of new “horizons” (in Gadamer’s term), where things come together both for the understanding and aesthetic enjoyment. Circumstances change and so do “horizons,” as new writings and artworks unfold new insights, and despite bleak foresights, possibilities of change seem to be more possible. The sensitivities of artists and intellectuals, as well as the depth of their understanding, vary, but their works always reflect their distance from and concern for these issues. In the end, the “truth-content” (in Adorno’s phrase) of the given work becomes the measure of its significance. 

In the case of my scholarship and art, the effort to arrive at “horizons” for convergences has been existential, or directly related to the meaning of my existence. Understanding my social-historical situatedness, or my condition, has always been both a motive and a purpose. This condition, that I share with a great number of Armenians, is being a multilingual and multicultural Armenian native of the Near East, with immediate family and ancestors driven from the extreme West and the extreme East of the Armenian World. It means having multiple hyphenated identities and inheriting multiple legacies of ancient and modern civilizations, peoples and cultures, including my own. In the processes of acculturation, this Armenian condition also required an urgency to understand the Armenian historical experience in comprehensive and critical terms, and not through assumptions and semi-epic narratives. I was fortunate to have two tools for these processes—scholarship and art—and both meant engaging in discourses and debates within myself and with the different worlds and communities I was part of. Therefore, as I argue, both my scholarship and art required “being” historical and artistic in a personal and direct manner, and not just doing/talking history, philosophy and art by training and career. I wrote and painted at specific periods and in response to specific circumstances, and thus, the second part of the book is structured on a schematic autobiographical grid.

Opposed to conventional and so-called “strictly academic” or “strictly artistic” practices, the book is also an illustrated argument, of sorts, in favor of interdisciplinary approaches. Like several contemporary thinkers, I consider dichotomies between disciplines and strict specializations artificial and “schizophrenic,” as Fredric Jameson puts it. Furthermore, looking at the arts as separate and distinct areas and activities, and judging artworks based on random concepts, such as taste, enjoyment, pleasure, digression or idea, miss and distort their social, historical and intellectual dimensions. Also, evaluating the arts in terms of the artist’s conceptuality and institutional legitimation in an “artworld” (a term coined by Arthur Danto), unscrupulously overlooks the social-historical embeddedness of human civilization as well. Unfortunately, these approaches seem to have become dominant and contributed to the blooming and proliferation of “scandalous” works, as Hal Foster describes.  

However, since the establishment of the Frankfurt School, for almost a century, in consideration of the arts, the humanities and the social sciences as tools for a critique of the world and the emancipation of humanity, many authors have urged awareness of the deterioration of contemporary mass cultures, media and their hegemonic aspects. Politics and the social sciences are deliberately kept at a distance from humanities and mass entertainment, observes Edward Said. Pointing at the absurdity of the separation of fields and disciplines, he suggests that “instead of non-interference and specialization, there must be interference, crossing of borders and obstacles.” 

Primarily as a critical, creative and not a descriptive or expository work, this “book of ideas and art” is written with these concerns. The objective is to communicate in words and images encounters and convergences with challenges and contradictions at different phases of my life. It is therefore self-reflective in conception, cross-disciplinary in scope, dialectical in method, hermeneutical in approach and in this case, artistic in _expression_. It consists of 175 large pages and 94 images. The contents are as follows: 

• The ‘Prologue on Scholarship and the Arts’ introduces the subject.
• Part One, ‘My Aesthetic’, in five chapters, provides the theoretical-critical context by brief discussions of aesthetic issues and theories through art history and the contemporary situation of the arts and mass cultures.  
• Part Two, ‘The Quest and the Path’, in four chapters, traces my path from the beginning, then to art schools, to my art of wartime (in Lebanon) and finally ‘Of the spirit of matter’ during the past two years. 
• The ‘Epilogue’ concludes the book, culminating with an Appendix, ‘Content with List of Illustrations.’ 

Part One. My Aesthetic

1. Aesthetics, Modernity, Postmodernism
2. Cognitivism, Expressivism, Truth-Content

III. Social-Historical Embeddedness of Art

1. The “culture industry”
2. Concretization as Alternative ‒ The Artwork

Plato and Aristotle were the first to reflect systematically upon the arts. Since then, art has been defined as imitation, madness, catharsis, beauty, taste, judgment, pleasure, understanding, play, _expression_ of emotion, psychological needs, spirituality and insight. Since different concerns and values are channeled through the arts, most definitions are bound to be too wide, too narrow or too dogmatic. The ontological status of art, or the question “what is art,” is the most basic yet controversial issue in aesthetics, a branch of philosophical sciences and part of the humanities. Coined in the 18th century after the Greek word aesthetikos, or sensory perception, aesthetics is the “science of perception.” It is also called philosophy of art ‒ perhaps not too accurately ‒ because artworks are also objects of knowledge.  

The tradition of Western art is usually traced back to Classical Greece and Rome. In the Middle Ages and under Christianity, the Classical forms and the ideals of pagan cultures receded. In the West, Christianity produced the sublime Gothic arts. In the East, under Islam, unique, geometric forms and patterns appeared in all the arts, and a different aesthetic and spirituality came about. Established traditions and criteria of art and beauty, especially in painting, were challenged in the 19th century by the romantics, the realists and soon the impressionists and the post-impressionists. Already in the early 20th century, tradition was challenged, improved upon, contradicted and sometimes almost abandoned by post-impressionism, cubism, surrealism, dada, ready-made art, experimental art, absurdist and generally avant-garde trends. On the other hand, there were fusions and overlapping, which generated unprecedented art forms everywhere.

I will skip the discussion about the historical development of art here and stop briefly at the concept of modernity and the truth-content of artworks. The term modernity was coined in the early 17th century. It comes from the late Latin adjective modernus, a derivation from the adverb modo, which means presently, right now. It referred to the achievements of the Renaissance, when Classical values and criteria were adopted and surpassed. Eventually, modernity was absorbed and exhausted; it was “dominant but dead,” as Jurgen Habermas put it. Highly controversial works for their times became classics and museum pieces. For almost a century, there has been a new “artworld.” It has its art-markets, where art is investment and artworks are often evaluated by their resale value. These factors seem to have distracted the critics and the public from core issues related to art, mass culture, entertainment and media. Postmodernism was a return to a serious reconsideration of tradition. It produced new and interdisciplinary approaches in social sciences and the humanities. Many contemporary figures like Michel Foucault are simultaneously philosophers, historians, psychologists and art critics. 

Adorno’s concept of truth-content of artworks is closely associated with the concept of modernity. Édouard Manet (1832-1883) is often considered as the first “modern” artist to break with tradition, and the forerunner of Modern Art. However, I suggest that a closer look at the middle decades of the 19th century will show the beginnings of true modernity in the works and writings of Gustave Courbet (1819-1887), a contemporary of Manet, Karl Marx, Dostoevsky and Tolstoy. As a true humanist and modernist, he not only contradicted aesthetic traditions and revolutionized subject matter, but also captured the social-historical embeddedness of the arts, much more philosophically than the philosopher Marx. In an open letter, labeled as the “Realist Manifesto” (December 25, 1861, Paris), he wrote: “Each epoch must have its artists who express it and reproduce it for the future. The human spirit must always begin work afresh in the present, starting off from acquired results…The real artists are those who pick up their age exactly at the point to which it has been carried by preceding times…Beauty, like truth, is a thing which is relative to the time in which one lives and to the individual capable of understanding it.” 

Some decades later, Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910) wrote: “Art is a human activity consisting in this, that one man consciously, by means of certain signs, hands onto others the feelings he has lived through, and that other people are infected by these feelings and experience them…If art is an important matter, a spiritual blessing, essential for all men (like religion, as the devotees of art are fond of saying), then it should be accessible to everyone. And if, as in our day, it is not accessible to all men, then one of two things: either art is not the vital matter it is represented to be, or that art which we call art is not the real thing.” 

From Chapter II, “Cognitivism, Expressivism, and Truth-Content,” I will briefly refer to cognitivism. Clearly, in my aesthetic, the cognitive or the intellectual as well as the social aspects of the creative process and the truth-content of the artwork have primacy. Courbet and Tolstoy among others put them in extreme simplicity. In addition to other values, such as beauty, emotion and enjoyment, for aesthetic cognitivists artworks must have profundity of meaning, or a truth-content. Cognitivism does not cancel the other values and rewards that artworks provide, such as pleasure. Pleasure and cognition are not mutually exclusive; the arts enrich our understanding of experiences and give immense enjoyment. Susanne Langer (1895-1985), a cognitivist, suggests that since in the aesthetic experience the pleasure involved is more intellectual than sensual, then it is akin to the experience of discovering truth, hence the unique intellectual dimension and significance of art. Truth here does not mean correspondence to something outside the work of art, or a coherence with anything else than itself. Each artwork has its own truth-content by virtue of an internal dialectic between the artist, subject matter, content, form and other elements that come together in the creation of the work. 

As discussed in Chapter III, “The Social Embeddedness of Art,” the first philosophical, rather cross-disciplinary, and comprehensive critique of culture, arts and society at large, came from the Institute for Social Research (established at the University of Frankfurt in 1923), known as the Frankfurt School. The scholars, known as critical theorists, studied cultural phenomena, such as music, film and mass entertainment. Focused upon human suffering and dedicated to universal emancipation, they suggested that social phenomena, such as culture, arts and mass entertainment, as well as other factors, play direct roles in maintaining and promoting domination and oppression. Their primary objective must be the emancipation of humanity from suffering and slavery and the creation of works that will lead to a world which satisfies the needs and powers of human beings.

Chapter IV is on the theory of “culture industry,” probably the most intriguing aspect of the thought of Theodore Adorno (1903-1969, one of the founders and prominent figures of Frankfurt School). Adorno depicts mass media in consumer societies as being based upon the systematic denial of genuine freedom. In consumer societies, the arts, especially music and performing arts, are parts of what he calls the “culture industry.” “Everything has value only in so far as it can be exchanged, not in so far as it is something of value in-itself.” 

The culture industry, according to Adorno, perpetuates rigid motifs that inhibit spiritual and mental freedoms and kill critical consciousness. With its emphasis on marketability, it deliberately and radically alters the core of the arts. Despite seeming and apparent liberalism and abolition of criteria and rules everywhere, there is massive standardization in all walks of life, which inevitably cancels intellectual stimulation. Artworks are treated as marketable commodities, accents and often screams. Their value becomes exchange value, and sometimes deliberately shock-value. The arts are totally controlled by the “culture industry,” art-markets, departments of fine arts, art schools, museums, journals and galleries. Mixed with mass media and entertainment, the arts are often instruments of homogenization. The public stands outside and anyway is a captive audience that often cannot even enjoy the artworks, because it cannot relate to or understand them. At any rate, understanding seems to have become a misplaced term in the artwork-viewer relationship. Fashion and pop arts are in turn examples of homogenization. At present, only gross exaggerations in attire, make-up, hair and mannerisms are distinguishing factors between individuals and works that otherwise are essentially indistinguishable.   

Over a century ago, most artists of the absurd, Dada, readymade, avant-garde and related movements of the later decades, presented their works, and still do, on wings and cushions of certain philosophies of art. They are now assimilated into the fabric of consumer society, and as Habermas says, their modernism is now “dead.” One cannot talk in any seriousness on the aesthetic path drawn by works like Tracey Emin’s (1963-) “My bed” (an actual filthy bed), and thousands of similar works. Their message as well as their artistic legacy is limited and consumed in the initiatives. A no-boundary and subjective conceptualism cannot be sustained on just verbal wings. Deliberately artless and accidental forms and piles of objects, also sometimes intentionally made junk piled up or hung in galleries and museums, are now legacies of past times, even if they still have exchange value in addition to institutional and media support. The intellectual core in both the conceptual and artistic processes is lacking, and one wonders if an artwork can stand on an abstraction or a reification in the mind of the artist or an article in a national paper by an art-writer. The verbal appendices and footnotes may have a temporary role in the propaganda, but they are not part of the work, therefore aesthetically and in the long run irrelevant.

In Chapter V, “Concretization as Alternative ‒ The Artwork,” I propose what I call “concretization” as an alternative approach. In my aesthetic, and as mentioned, the social-historical embeddedness of art, dialectical thinking, culture industry, hermeneutical understanding, truth-content and situatedness are foundational elements. Based on these basic concepts, and to bypass – not to avoid, for that is an impossibility ‒ an abstract discussion on the ontology of art, I suggest a paradigm shift from focusing on the ontology of art, or “what art is,” to “what a given artwork means,” or its truth-content. This is a concretization or taking the artwork as a concrete and coherent entity, a thing-in-itself, which must carry its own truth-content and thus offer a journey worth taking. I argue that since the artwork is the only objective reality created in an art-language, in certain social-historical circumstances, also because of them, it is the only horizon or context and criterion for evaluation, understanding, communication and enjoyment. 

Concretization is a shift from the artist to the artwork, which must contain a truth-content as the criterion of its aesthetic significance and value. A concept in the mind of the artist does not justify or legitimize an artwork. There is obviously an unscrupulous underestimation of the public’s taste and intelligence, when urinals, soiled diapers and scattered boulders are placed in museums and public spaces. Adorno writes: “The artwork has an internal truth content to the extent that the artwork’s import can be found internally and externally either true or false. This truth is not a construct, it is historical but not arbitrary; non-propositional yet calling for propositional claims to be made about it; utopian in its reach, yet firmly tied to specific societal conditions. Truth content is the way in which an artwork simultaneously challenges the way things are and suggests how things could be better, even if it may fail, as it will, to change anything.” 

To sum up: the artwork is an “event,” an “actual occasion” (in A. N. Whitehead’s phrase) in which encounters happen with the things of the world and all converge in well-executed artistic forms. The truth-content is the totality of all the factors in the making of the work, be it a text, a painting, a musical composition or other. Furthermore, as a process, the work of art is a journey worth taking to encounter new knowledge and sensibilities. The more enriching these are, the more valuable the work is, but still the concrete object, the artwork, remains the core, the center.   

Part Two. The Quest and The Path

1. Prelude
2. Paint and brush
3. The cataclysm
4. Museums, studios, models
5. Encounters with Strife and Suffering
6. Time of reckoning and choices
7. First news and glimpses
8. Wartime and situatedness
9. Armenian painting in Lebanon  
10. The turning point – Aesthetic-philosophical positioning

III. Wartime Art and Aesthetic

1. Moments and momentum of war   
2. “Landscapes”
3. Thoughts and exits in chaos 
4. Exits to Armenia
5. Portraits for the memory
6. Of the spirit of matter 
7. My American-Armenian Experience – Re-positioning
8. The transition
9. From the “bridge” to “unconcealment”

Part Two in four chapters traces my path from the beginning to art schools in Beirut and London, then wartime art (1975-1991) and scholarship, then a second phase of scholarship over three decades, and finally back to art during the past two years. Two childhood dreams shaped my life and led me out of my hometown. The first was wearing what as a child I called the “square hat” (mortarboard), and the second was going to an art school. As a child, I don’t remember having toys or asking for any. I especially resented dolls, and still do. Since there was no shortage of reading material in the house and my immediate environment, I read whatever I found; I drew on any piece of paper, painted landscapes and portraits, and participated in local exhibits. My art education remained a pending matter while in my hometown Aleppo. Since the language of instruction at school was Arabic and French, I signed my name Walk. I have included a few of my early works, and one landscape of olive trees.

The olive trees of A‘zāz,1959. Oil on board, 68×51 cm

In 1965 I graduated from BCW (Beirut College for Women) with two majors: fine arts and philosophy. The dream of the “hat” came true, but studying art was a devastating encounter with the realities of art education at this college at that time. After graduation, when I began reading art history and aesthetics, I was appalled at the poverty of the entire fine arts curriculum. The encounter with a certain instructor was cataclysmic. Soon after graduation I destroyed everything that I had made, except for a plaster figurine of Socrates, “Socrates the Satire,” from a sculpture course, and “Broken face,” from a ceramics course. Socrates, the wisest man and greatest satirist, as Nietzsche described him, stood for my deep discontent and critical dispositions; the broken face was mine as a painter. 

Broken face, Beirut, 1964. Ceramic, 25 cm

In 1966, I spent a year at the City and Guilds School of Arts in London, where I worked with great enthusiasm on figure drawing. In my spare time, I visited the museums and sketched. Of the dozens of sketches, I have included three: our backyard from the bedroom window and two models. A year in London set new standards and frameworks for my aesthetic; it also expanded my knowledge of art history, but I still failed to overcome the trauma at BCW. In 1967, I began graduate studies in philosophy at AUB (American University of Beirut) and graduated two years later with a dissertation in medieval Armenian philosophy. Previously, my thesis for the bachelor of arts degree had been in the same discipline. 

The classics of the studio, London, 1966. Pencil, 23.5×35 cm

Medieval Armenian intellectual culture and its relations with the Islamic environment, a subject remotely approached in Armenian studies, intrigued me both as an Armenian native of the Muslim world and as a student of philosophy. In 1969, as a graduate student, I made a “discovery” that the little known treatise by Yovhannēs Erznkats‘i (d. 1292/3) entitled “Views Gathered from the Writings of Tajik [Muslim] Philosophers” (I Tachkats‘ Imastasirats‘ Grots‘ K‘agheal Bank‘) was in fact a beginner’s summary of the esoteric compendium of sciences, the Epistles of the Brethren of Purity (Rasā’il Ikhwān al-Ṣafā’) of the 10th century at ‘Abbāsid Basra. Soon, I found out that Yovhannēs had also borrowed and adopted an Islamic cosmological treatise, basic texts from the Nāșirī futuwwa (urban youth coalitions) literature, and the latter’s Constitution into Armenian culture and gone completely unnoticed. These were complete novelties both for Armenian and Islamic scholarship. 

In philosophical hermeneutics, the hitherto unknown Islamic sources of a prominent Armenian theologian-philosopher of the 13th century is called “relevant information.” The paradigm created by the initiative of Yovhannēs shattered my horizon of things Armenian and what was done in Armenian Studies under narrow and partial themes such as “Arab domination in Armenia,” Armenian “colonies [gaghut] in the Arab world,” the “contribution of Armenians” and surely the Genocide. The case of Erznkats‘i opened a new vantage point on the vast and unexplored field of Islamic-Armenian interactive history, and generally, the Armenian historical experience in worlds of Islam. It was a beginning that would define much of my scholarship. In general, understanding 14 centuries of the historical experiences of the Armenians with Arabs, Turks, Mongols, Kurds, Iranians and Indians had existential significance for me. I grew up in a mixed part of the old city of Aleppo, where historic churches and mosques stood side by side. As a trilingual child (speaking Armenian in the family, Arabic with neighbors and school and Turkish with grandparents) growing up in a very nationalist Dashnak environment, I felt as a native but of a certain peculiar category. At the university in Beirut, where in the sixties dozens of nationalities and cultures from the East and the West mingled in this cosmopolitan city, identity was an elastic issue but no great concern, at least theoretically. As I saw it then, beyond essentialist assumptions and nationalist models, both as concept and perception, identity was not an apeiron or undefinable something, but an awareness that various interactions and experiences simultaneously generated and absorbed. 

Chapter II, Encounters with strife and suffering ‒ In 1975, the start of the war in Lebanon, my return to art was a spontaneous response to the first news of the war. At the time, we were in Kettering-Dayton, Ohio. I did most of my meditating and drawing on the ominous situation, sitting on the couch by the terrace door. This was my “view.” I tried to process my encounters with the catastrophe. In the book I have included four sketches, one of which is pictured here. 

The view, Dayton, 1975. Pencil, 29×23 cm

From the spring of 1975 to the summer of 1991, war was the universe. Between episodes of calm, random or  deliberate bombardment, sniper fire, assassinations, kidnappings, street battles, stray bullets and shrapnel, also in the house were wartime realities. Life continued despite the war-circumstances, which should have put things at a standstill. In most arts, especially music, theater and literature, brilliant artists drew revolutionary paths. There were brave intellectuals, journalists, poets, painters, sculptors and theater people. Some were liquidated; others forced to migrate. Encounters with music, theater and literature were intervals or “intermezzos” for us. I have one, from Caracalla’s dance theater, “Intermezzos at Caracalla.”

First news, Dayton, 1975. Pencil, 30×21.5 cm

My first encounter with death was in the early summer of 1976. It was a sniper victim at our building door on ‘Abd al-‘Azīz street in Hamra. I made a sketch immediately, “Sniper fire.”

Sniper fire, Beirut, 1976. Ink, 42×25 cm

Hundreds of absurd deaths happened daily, everywhere and over the next 15 years. Ink pens, drawing pencils and sketch pads were portable media and always accessible. Dead people on the streets were iconic war-realities. During a relatively long period of calm in 1977, a feeble gleam of hope allowed me to return to the large canvas, and I made a mural-style painting in acrylic as a tribute to all those who struggled, endured their condition in pain or died, “Mural in tribute.”

Mural in tribute, Beirut, I977. Acrylic, 203×81 cm

During the next few years, and prior to what I call my “wartime” drawings, also as a form of self-placement and self-identification, I began an ambitious project of writing the history of Armenian painting in Lebanon, the most intriguing aspect of the community in Lebanon at the time. Now as a “Lebanese-Armenian” (from Syrian-Armenian), also an intellectual and painter, I wanted to define my own position and path in the context of Lebanese-Armenian culture. This was a Nietzschean reversal of the Cartesian cogito. Instead of ‘Cogito ergo sum’—I think therefore I am—it was a moment for ‘Sum ergo cogito’—I exist, therefore I think—rather, must think. 

From the early sixties to the mid-seventies, Lebanon was at the height of a revival of sorts. Many factors in the making and the historical development of this extraordinary country at that period contributed to turning it and the people (of over 15 different ethnic and religious factions) into bridges between the West and the East. Yearly, a few hundred art exhibitions and “salons” were held. Strangely, most Lebanese painters were Armenian. This was an intriguing phenomenon that needed explanation and historicization. It became the problematique of my research. The phenomenon was unusual for several reasons. The most important was the fact that the art of painting – not miniatures, decorative arts and crafts ‒ was not an art that Armenian survivors from the 19th century Ottoman massacres and the Genocide in 1915 brought with them to the Arab countries. There was no art of painting of any type and standard in Cilicia and the Armenian provinces of Turkey, where hundreds of thousands were either eliminated or driven out. I argued that if practically, the art of painting among Armenians first appeared in Syria, Lebanon, Egypt and some of Europe, then the phenomenon had to do with local circumstances. Therefore, painting was an _expression_ of the responses of the artists to their condition, hence the social embeddedness of their work and its unique historical significance. Furthermore, I believed that painting, music and dance flourished, because they bypassed the linguistic barrier and other economic and social challenges that most Armenians faced during those decades. Therefore, my basic argument was that the post-Genocide Armenian condition in Lebanon was the soil out of which the art of the Armenian painters grew and reflected it. 

On these grounds I began my research into the history of Armenian painting in Lebanon, focusing on about 50 figures who were active from 1930 to 1980. Locating and collecting basic information about the painters, their works, exhibitions and other artistic events were initial tasks. There were no references or studies of any sort about the art of the Armenians or the community in Lebanon, except casual reports in the papers. Literally, I had to go through the entire press of half a century, visit the galleries, interview the painters themselves, as well as individuals who were close to painters’ circles and collectors. I gathered photographs, advertisements, posters, brochures and tickets. In the meantime, I also took photographs of all the paintings and the artists I came across. When fieldwork was too dangerous, I went back to my research and writing on other subjects. 

My research confirmed my initial hypothesis that the works of the painters were indeed responses to the post-Genocide Lebanese-Armenian (Libananahay) circumstances and had to be analyzed as such. Style was secondary and followed other factors. Therefore, classifications could not be based on stylistic aspects nor strict chronology. I identified six types of responses to the crisis of identity and organized my analysis and the book accordingly: a passive reaction to the local conditions and a withdrawal into the tragic past and a sub-reality; a positive reaction to the special circumstances of the Armenian community and a humanistic art, which however was too abstract and formalistic; formalism and a strongly academic disposition; a negative reaction, rejection and surrealism; a positive neutralism and a stylistic preoccupation; a direct adoption of local identity and marginalization of national identity. The book was supposed to be published within the same year, but it was delayed by three years because of the ongoing war. It is entitled Armenian Painting in Lebanon in the Light of the Crisis of Identity [Lebanese-Armenian Painting in the Light of Identity Anxiety], 1984.

If the measure of the meaning of a work is its truth-content, then its focus must be on the realities of life at the given time. This is what I mean by my aesthetic-philosophical positioning. My aesthetic took a sharp turn from studio mentality into wartime mentality, to the facts of universal suffering. As their titles suggest, all my sketches until the end of the war are based on specific events, situations, persons, responses and thoughts. I was at a turning point with a cathartic force that produced a sketch, “End of the studio.” 

I had to re-position myself also as a West Armenian thinker. Already in 1982, I began reading whatever was available on West Armenian philosophical thought from the 19th century onwards. I focused on five major figures and identified two distinct trends: the transcendentalists and the vitalists. I also made their portraits and annexed a philosophical glossary in Western Armenian. The book was published in 1987, entitled Pages of West Armenian Philosophical Thought [Pages from Western Armenian Thought]. 

End of the studio, Beirut, 1980. Pencil, 52.5×41.5 cm

There are films that can’t be watched with a box of popcorn. There are films that can’t, and shouldn’t, be watched just once. There are films that leave a lasting mark. Amerikatsi is one of those films. 

The news that an Armenian film was shortlisted for the Academy Awards immediately sparked the interest of my family and me, and we decided to watch it. From the very beginning of Amerikatsi, the mise-en-scène of the first shot and the first notes of the melody, I knew something great awaited us. Throughout the film, we saw and experienced everything, from hatred to love, from frustration to hopefulness, from overwhelming sorrow and despair to immense joy and excitement. Actor, writer and director Michael Goorjian made us cry and smile at the same time, creating a beautiful mix of emotions and sentiments that made us feel like we were there with the protagonist, looking at life from behind the prison bars of Soviet Armenia. There was so much life in Goorjian’s eyes, so much charisma in his acting and such power in his storytelling that only a few minutes after the film ended, something in me whispered: “You need to interview this person, ASAP!”

Upon interviewing Goorjian, I recognized a person who is not only talented and professional, but also humble, sincere and courageous, as well as dedicated and genuine in his love for Armenia. Even though he did not use loud, pompous words to describe Armenia and Armenian culture, his way of showing and embodying the Armenian character was enough to convey his love for our homeland, for our peculiarities and cultural traditions. His film and our conversation are devoid of artificiality and full of hopeful realism, showing both the tragic and the beautiful aspects of the Armenian past, the good and bad traits of the Armenian character, and the fragility and resilience of humanity as a whole. 

Milena Baghdasaryan (M.B.): Childhood plays an important role in a person’s life. What is your most impactful childhood memory? Do you have a favorite childhood film? What was your first encounter with your Armenianness?

Michael Goorjian (M.G.): I would say theater. I remember going to plays when I was a young boy and being so affected by what I saw. For me, storytelling and acting were really sort of magical. It was almost religious. Speaking about films, I saw a lot of American films as a young boy, but then I do remember in high school being taken to see a French film called the Big Blue, which was a film about deep sea diving, and it was so visual. There was a lot of the film without dialogue, which was just in the water, and it was incredible. It really was for me very, very effective to see that film. After that, I started to watch many films from other cultures, European films, films from the Middle East, and I realized how different people saw the world. I learned a lot that way.

In terms of my Armenianness, I didn’t really grow up that connected to being Armenian. I grew up more as an American. I’m half-Armenian. My grandparents were Genocide survivors who came to America, and they raised my father to be American. He was a scientist—he worked for NASA—and I think partly because of that we didn’t go to church that often, and in America a lot of the Armenian community tends to revolve around the church. It’s kind of a center point for Armenians to meet and get to know each other. So because I didn’t have that growing up, it wasn’t until I came to Los Angeles and went to UCLA to study theater that I started to meet more Armenians and get involved with Armenian communities; and then it was in 2006 that I first came and visited Armenia, and that was quite a wonderful experience for me.

M.B.: How has your Armenianness impacted your ‘signature’ as a filmmaker? Are there any Armenian filmmakers, landscapes, melodies or artworks from which you have drawn inspiration for your artistic signature in general and for Amerikatsi in particular?

M.G.: I’ve seen a lot of Parajanov films, and I’ve seen some early Soviet Armenian films. Not too much more than that. More recently I’ve seen more Armenian films, but growing up I didn’t know much about Armenian cinema beyond Parajanov. But in terms of influence, I would say I was more affected by the people that I met, especially from that first trip to Armenia in 2006. You know, Armenian culture is very diverse. There’s all sorts of versions of it, depending on where you live, what dialect you speak, which church you go to, and if you go to church or not. So I think my experiences in the country were the most influential for making Amerikatsi. Just because the film is set there and because it takes place during the Soviet era, as an American and as an Armenian from the diaspora, my understanding of what it was like to live in that time was very limited. So I relied heavily on the artists, actors, crew and technicians in Armenia to help inform a lot of that side of the story.

M.B.: In one of your interviews you mentioned that you “wanted to make an Armenian film that was hopeful.” In your film, Charlie demonstrates a supernatural level of resilience and hopefulness. How do you keep your hope alive in challenging times? What would be your formula for keeping our hope alive as a nation today?

M.G.: It’s difficult, because you have to face reality, and you can’t ignore the truth of tragedies and conflicts and the terrible things that Armenians in particular have gone through. At the same time, I think you need to come back to the simple things in life. In the film in particular, I wanted to help share Armenian culture. And I always come back to the idea of the table, the dinner table and how, for me, especially when I came to Armenia in 2006, I saw the contrast between American and Armenian cultures of eating. In America, sometimes eating just means getting fast food; you eat and you run. On the contrary, in Armenia you sit down for a meal, and sometimes it is five hours long. And we’re toasting, and we’re talking and living. To me, it is these things that I think we need to remember to appreciate. And the fact that, despite everything, all of the tragic things and conflicts and divisions within Armenians, at the same time we’re very good at enjoying life, and that’s the part that we have to remember. 

M.B.: How would you evaluate the current state of Armenian cinema? As both an insider and an outsider, have you observed and identified any gaps and potential solutions to fill them? 

M.G.: I think the best way to evolve and grow is through just more voices, more diversity, and different types of films and different types of filmmakers. We, at least from my standpoint, from an outside perspective, think that we need to make a big genocide movie that will teach the world. But no, we don’t. We just need more movies and more about the different angles of Armenian culture that is so rich and which has so many aspects to it. I think we just need more people making different things and not being too judgmental about what is Armenian and what is not, or what is real Armenian. It doesn’t matter. Even if there’s just a character who’s Armenian, great! Or if there is some bit of our culture. Or if it just takes place in Armenia. It doesn’t matter. I just think we need more, and more different kinds of things. Infrastructure-wise, it feels for me that in Armenia there is just more commercial stuff and then a kind of high-art filmmaking, and I think the more they come together, and the more there’s a middle ground, the less of just low and just high and more of middle, the better. That would be my suggestion.

M.B.: A significant part of the film Amerikatsi takes place behind prison bars. Even those who are not in prison still live and act behind non-physical, intangible barriers created by the communist regime. Yet, in the film, the bars eventually serve not as a constraint but rather as a fuel for creativity. Do you encounter such ‘bars’ (whether financial, political or any other) in your career as a filmmaker today, and are they a limitation or rather a locomotive?

M.G.: You kind of answer the question right there. I would say, of course there are many constraints. Making films is not easy. It takes money, it takes people, it’s a big process, and there’s no way you don’t come up against barriers and things that will make it difficult. Otherwise, everybody would do it all the time. I think if you can approach those barriers and try to find the opportunities within them, you will succeed, because constraints can stop what you’re doing, but they can also make it stronger. When we shot Amerikatsi, it was right at the beginning of the pandemic. We were even planning to go into lockdown for months at a time, but a lot of those constraints and problems that we faced ultimately ended up making it a better film. So I would say, every time you face a challenge, ask yourself if there is something there that can help what you are doing and make it better. 

M.B.: What was your secret ‘recipe’ for combining and balancing the roles of director, writer and actor so harmoniously and successfully? Did this multitasking approach cause any difficulties on set, and how did you overcome such challenges? 

M.G.: I would say it all comes down to your relationships with the people you’re working with and being able to trust them. I allow my cinematographer to do what we’ve hired him to do. I don’t try to do his job. I try to convey to him everything I see or feel, and then let him do what he’s meant to do. So I think the key for me in playing those different roles is that, the more I can rely on the people I’m working with, the more it all becomes possible. I wouldn’t say it was easy. But it’s possible by being able to have people who you rely on. When I’m acting, I tend to not even look at what we’ve shot. I trust that we’ve got what we need to get. That requires having a relationship with the cinematographer, the first A. D., your crew and your actors. You really have to have a good, strong relationship. At the end of the day, you’re all working for the same goal.

Milena Baghdasaryan interviewing Michael Goorjian

M.B.: In Amerikatsi, the actors fuse so perfectly with the characters they embody that sometimes it seems that the roles have been created for and with the actors in mind. What were your criteria when choosing the cast members? Did you see yourself in Charlie’s role since the very beginning, or was it a decision you came to gradually?

M.G.: I wrote Charlie’s role imagining playing it, but we did try for a while to get other actors to do it, because it felt like a lot for me to direct and to act, but eventually it seemed like the best thing. In terms of the other actors, we were blessed with so many great performances and actors, and part of that is because I trusted them to take their roles and did not try to control them, and instead to have them bring anything of their own to these roles. So I think it’s thanks to that freedom that it feels very much like you said. As an actor, I know what it’s like to work on something and be constrained and not allowed to invest myself into it. So I always try to work with actors and help them to find the role so that they feel like they’re free to play and do stuff that makes the character richer, and then it also benefits me as a filmmaker, because it makes the film better.

M.B.: How has the Oscars nomination changed your life? Has it changed the lens through which you look at your own film? In general, how has your relationship with Amerikatsi evolved from the time of its ideation through production, release and distribution? Is the final product what you had envisioned initially? 

M.G.: Right now we’re shortlisted, so we’re working on being nominated, but even just being shortlisted means a lot to us, as it is the first time for Armenia to get this far. I would say it has brought me confidence that what we’ve created is something that is good, and you don’t have to be Armenian to appreciate it. It’s wonderful to see the acknowledgement, the reaction and the interest from non-Armenians and from film critics. I have had many screenings where people come up to me after the film and tell me how they knew nothing about this part of history. Their interest in Armenia and in the Armenian culture is for me the success of the film. It’s helping to create a bridge between the Armenian community and the non-Armenians. 

M.B.: Why are the Academy Awards, and awards in general, important for an artist? Are they important?

M.G.: I’ve always thought, “An award? Ah, that’s silly!” But especially for something like this, I realized the importance of it, both for me as a filmmaker by getting recognition (awards help bring attention to a project), but also because this is for Armenia. To help Armenia have a place in world cinema is important, for people to look towards Armenia for art and culture and not just because there’s conflict. Before being shortlisted for the Oscars, most of our audience was Armenian, and most of the people who knew about the film were Armenian, but the Oscars shortlisting now opened it up. So a lot more people, non-Armenians, are going to see what it is that’s being talked about. They get interested. Awards are silly in a way, but also I think they are valuable, especially in certain cases like this. I mean, it’s not going to make a huge difference for France if they get a nomination; they’ve had millions of nominations. It’s a big country. But for Armenia it does make a difference. And so I think that’s important.

M.B.: What are you looking forward to in 2024? Are there any projects that you are currently working on and about which you would like to share with our readers?

M.G.: What am I looking forward to? I’m looking forward to developing more projects that I can come shoot in Armenia!

M.B.: What has been the best advice you have received as a filmmaker, and what would be your own best advice to young Armenian filmmakers? 

M.G.: Best advice to myself is understanding that a large project that involves a lot of moving pieces (e.g. film or anything else) is always going to be difficult, and there are always difficult times, but being resilient and sticking with it eventually pays off. If your heart is in the right place, if you’re doing it for the right reasons, if you can try to stick with what you believe in, it pays off. In terms of advice for other filmmakers – be daring. The more voices we the Armenians have the better. We’re not competing against each other. We all help each other. So I think the more we can make films and make art and move forward, the better it will be. We have a rich history that should inform us, but inform us to move forward. We don’t need to just retell the past. We need to continue. I would love, 100 years from now, people to look back at this era and say, “Wow, Armenia…So many great movies and music! And it all came out of Armenia during this time.” We can do that. 

From December 8-15, the President of Armenia, Vahagn Khachaturyan, visited Argentina and Uruguay to attend the inauguration of the new Argentinian President Javier Milei. President Khachaturyan also met with leaders of the local Armenian community. I had the opportunity to interview him on December 11 and asked him about some of the government’s decisions regarding the negotiation process with Azerbaijan, as well as its diplomatic strategies with South and North America. 

The trip did not receive much coverage in Armenian media or Diaspora newspapers, but it left many concepts and issues to be analyzed, especially in a community as politicized as the Argentine-Armenian community.

The inauguration of the President of Argentina

President Khachaturyan began his visit with a meeting with the newly-elected President of Argentina Javier Milei on December 9, whom he invited to visit Armenia. It was Milei’s first protocol activity with a foreign delegation that arrived in the country to witness his inauguration.

The next day, Khachaturyan attended the Argentine Congress and Casa Rosada to participate in the inauguration ceremony, along with the President of Uruguay Luis Lacalle Pou, whom he met later in Montevideo, the King of Spain Felipe VI, the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky, the Prime Minister of Hungary Viktor Orban, the President of Paraguay Santiago Peña, the President of Bolivia Luis Arce Catacora and the President of Chile Gabriel Boric.

When I asked him about these meetings, the Armenian president confirmed that he met with Zelensky: “We have many issues to discuss, especially related to the Armenian community of Ukraine, where 500,000 Armenians live. It is important for Ukraine to know and understand our position: we are not allies of anyone in this war. We are always ready to demonstrate humanitarian assistance, and we have done it by sending humanitarian assistance to Ukraine two months ago,” he said.

This meeting and the visit to Argentina were especially relevant in light of the current geopolitical context of Armenia. Milei, a far-right populist politically aligned with the former presidents of the United States and Brazil, Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro, announced on several occasions during his political campaign that he would not have diplomatic relations with what he called “communist countries” such as Russia, China and Brazil. Russia did not send any representative to Milei’s inauguration and, weeks after taking office, Milei announced that Argentina would not join the BRICS bloc with Brazil, Russia, India and China. Armenia’s gesture of sending its president to the inauguration must have resonated in Russia, especially since he was one among few presidents to travel to Argentina for the occasion.

Armenian President Vahagn Khachaturyan with Argentinian President Javier Milei (Press Office of the President of Armenia)

Gratitude towards Argentina

Asked about diplomacy with South American countries, the Armenian President emphasized, “We have to make our work more active in South America,” because “in many cases it seems to us that the presence of the community is enough to have close relations, but we realize that we must also have relations with the state authorities of each country, establish relations and develop them.”

“The recent events of 2020 showed us that there are no primary and secondary countries. We have to establish relations with all countries, and if those relations are warm, even better,” Khachaturyan said. He referred in particular to the former Argentinian President Alberto Fernandez and the first Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court Luis Moreno Ocampo, two Argentine figures who have been very important in telling the world about events in Armenia and Artsakh.

During his visit, Khachaturyan also met with the outgoing President Alberto Fernandez, who was awarded the Medal of Honor after having condemned the genocidal blockade of Azerbaijan against the Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh). On September 9, 2023, Fernandez criticized the Artsakh blockade during his speech at the First Plenary Session of the 18th Summit of Heads of State and Government of the G20. On September 13, Fernandez again denounced the blockade against the population of Artsakh during the Latin American and Caribbean Conference on Peace Operations of the United Nations Organization in Buenos Aires. Finally, on September 19, Fernandez referred to the attacks unleashed by Azerbaijan against the population of Artsakh during his speech at the 78th U.N. General Assembly.

Under Fernandez’s administration, a plane carrying 15 tons of humanitarian aid collected by the institutions of the Armenian community of Argentina and a team of volunteers from the Argentine Foreign Ministry were sent to Armenia to help the forcibly displaced population of Artsakh at the beginning of November.

On January 5, Armenian Ambassador to Argentina Hovhannes Virabyan awarded the Medal of Gratitude to Luis Moreno Ocampo on behalf of the Armenian President, thanking him for his reports on the genocide against the Armenian population of Artsakh by Azerbaijan. “Every step in favor of the recognition and condemnation of the crimes committed against the people of Nagorno-Karabakh is a signal, a particular warning to all those who are still trying to normalize relations and achieve their objectives through the use of force and violations of human rights,” said Khachaturyan in a recorded message that day.

Armenian President Vahagn Khachaturyan with former Argentinian President Alberto Fernández (Press Office of the President of Armenia)

Closed-door meetings with the Armenian community

In both Argentina and Uruguay, the President held meetings with representatives of the Armenian institutions in which, in summary, he defended the decision of the government of Armenia to sign a peace treaty with Azerbaijan and presented the “Crossroads for Peace” project.

The community leadership engaged in an internal debate about whether or not to participate in the meetings. Hagop Tabakian, president of the Armenian National Committee of South America (ANC-SA) and member of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF) of South America, explained to the Weekly that even though they “have many differences with the administration,” “our organization has as a fundamental idea the strengthening of the state of Armenia.” “We believed that not participating in that, beyond the people in power, would affect the presence of the state of Armenia in South America. The last thing Argentina did was to support the people of Artsakh and denounce what Azerbaijan was doing with the blockade and the attacks, so that was what turned into our internal debate of going or not going in the case of the President’s presence,” he added.

“There are sensitive differences that separate us with the current government of Armenia on such transcendental issues such as its position on Artsakh and its future, the relations with Turkey and Azerbaijan and the cession of the rights and future claims of the Armenian people. We remain committed to the strengthening of the Republic of Armenia, the defense of the violated rights of the Armenian people in 1915 and today, the protection of the security of the borders and the sovereignty, and basically the existence of the Armenian people,” Tabakian continued.

Rubén Kechichian, Honorary President of the Armenian General Benevolent Union (AGBU) in Argentina, also gave his opinion on the visit to the Weekly: “We must divide the evaluation of the visit into two parts. The protocol and diplomatic part seemed impeccable to me, since not many delegations had meetings with President Milei and different representatives of the government and the political circle. At the community level, it was reduced only to the meeting at the Hilton Hotel with a limited presence of leaders and personalities, which left a wide spectrum of the active and educational community without the possibility of listening to it. Personally, I am convinced that visits of this magnitude have positive consequences that mobilize national and patriotic feelings in broad sectors of the active community,” Kechichian said.

Maral Masrian, President of Armenian Relief Society (ARS) of South America, said that Khachaturyan underestimated community representatives during internal meetings by “saying that we only got the news here and not the realities.” “He wanted to convince us. He kept saying what he wanted, repeating his speech and not answering our questions,” she said.

Many community members from Montevideo criticized the organization of the meeting: “The invitation was very informal and disorganized, not at all in line with the planning required by a president’s visit,” said members of the ARS of Uruguay. “According to the information we continually receive from our ARS colleagues from Armenia through the Central Commission, who work tirelessly to assist the forcibly displaced population of Artsakh, it seems to us that what the President of Armenia reported does not coincide with the reality that we know they live. Faced with this distance between words and reality, it is not possible to rate the view positively.”

Luciné Varjabedian, representative of the Armenian National Committee (ANC) of Uruguay, called the meeting a “meaningless formality, to which we participants were called by WhatsApp messages, which reveals an alarming level of improvisation.” “The message that the President of Armenia has left towards the community was the continuation of a self-deprecating speech, where apparently all the tragedy that occurred in the last months of 2023 with the loss of the territory of Artsakh and the forced displacement of our 120,000 compatriots have been overcome thanks to the government of Armenia, conveying that the issue of Artsakh was a settled issue, despite the latent danger to the security and territorial integrity of the Republic of Armenia,” Varjabedian said.

Armenian President Vahagn Khachaturyan meeting with the Armenian community of Argentina

International sanctions, military aid and a peace treaty with Azerbaijan

During our interview, I asked Khachaturyan if Armenia would support sanctions against the Azerbaijani authorities and the project to encourage the United States to stop providing military aid to Azerbaijan. “We have to be able to understand what our interest is. In many cases, not understanding our interest, we end up serving the interests of others. This is nothing new. Even the most friendly country has its own interests. We have to understand what are its objectives when the United States limits the sale of arms to Azerbaijan. If the aim of this decision is to defend democracy in Armenia, it is of course acceptable for us. It is important. We have to be able to work in that direction. Their proposal does not have to be without a specific purpose,” he said.

“Of course, we can also ask various countries to impose sanctions, but would that not disturb our main purpose, which is peace?” he continued. “Any initiative that is made by the members of the Armenian communities in the Diaspora has to be done in the sense of not disturbing the process that has already started, which is the peace process. In many cases we realized that a careless gesture, a careless word, could have a negative influence on the whole process.”

One of the questions that is not generally asked of the Armenian government is why it seeks to sign a peace treaty with Azerbaijan, a country that it accuses of failing to comply with signed agreements, especially the trilateral ceasefire declaration of November 9, 2020. “In politics you have to be pragmatic, and pragmatism often does not accept emotions. I believe that we do not have to go too far. There are historical facts that prove what I am saying. Our countries and our region need peace. To reach peace we have to engage in direct talks with Azerbaijan, or indirectly with mediators but dealing with certain issues,” he said. 

Khachaturyan also called the blockade of Artsakh a “very painful” situation. “We could not use the possibilities of our partner countries or explain to them that in case the Lachin Corridor would remain closed, it would mean that Artsakh would be practically emptied of Armenians,” he said. He stressed that the forced displacement was “foreseeable” for the Armenian government: “We knew it from our own experience. We knew that Azerbaijan was going to act like this. But many were surprised by what happened on September 19.”

In conclusion

The Armenian President’s visit to South America was well received by the states of Argentina and Uruguay. It was a necessary visit, given all the selfless support from Argentina and Uruguay to Armenia. The leadership of the Armenian communities understood this, leading to their decision to participate in meetings with the president, despite the general criticism of the current administration.

His Holiness Catholicos Aram I of the Great House of Cilicia

MESSAGE OF HIS HOLINESS CATHOLICOS ARAM I
OF THE GREAT HOUSE OF CILICIA
ANTELIAS

To the Prelates, the clergy, the community authorities of the Catholicosate of the Great House of Cilicia, and to the daughters and sons of our people,

On the eve of 2024, with fatherly love, patriarchal blessings and intense patriotic feelings, we greet the beloved­ daughters and sons of our people from the Monastery of the­­ Catholicosate of the Great House of Cilicia. We greet especially our Prelates, community authorities, the organizations and associations that are active in the Armenian community, as well as community, educational, charitable, cultural, social and sports institutions, and we wish them all a year of new achievements. We pray to Most High God that the New Year that begins with His Son’s becoming man and His revelation­ will be full of heavenly ­riches and grace for our people.

***

As it is well-known to the daughters and sons of our people, since 2003 we have dedicated each year to an event, development, value or concern in our collective life. We have made the necessary analysis and highlights within each topic, and then we have conveyed our fatherly suggestions to ­our people. We have often stressed that the church with its essence and calling is a mission directed to the people. Indeed, the teachings of Christ were not theoretical or casual; they had direct relevance for the life of the people. Today, too, the church is called to invite its spiritual flock to address ­concerns and challenges that have direct import to their lives. At the same time, it is the church’s mission to­ give the necessary instructions for further implementation of spiritual, moral and national values. This is the goal of our patriarchal proclamations. We are satisfied to declare that the proclamations published so far have been the object of ample discussion­ in our collective life and, in light of the concerns and the suggestions expressed in them, the daughters and sons of our people have been driven to review and reassess their individual and community life.

As you know, the years 2022 and 2023 were dedicated to the Diaspora, declaring 2022 the Year of the Diaspora and 2023 the Year of the Diaspora: From Self-Examination to Reorganization. Our decision to focus on the Diaspora for two consecutive years was not at random. The formation and development of the Diaspora has its own process, and it has always been subject to the influence of external factors and environmental conditions. Today, the Diaspora faces serious challenges. In view of the­ penetration of the global culture into Armenian life,­ the retreat of national values, the degradation of the Armenian language and other critical problems, the revalorization and reorganization of the Diaspora have become an urgent imperative.

In the two declarations,­ in 2022­ we made the following statement about the current situation of the Diaspora: “The Armenian identity is exposed to rapid attrition in the Diaspora. Our structures have begun to lose their relevance. Hence, the revitalization of the Diaspora is a mandatory task in the light of the circumstances and conditions of our present life.” And in 2023, we made the following comment regarding the structures of the Diaspora: “The Diaspora has an enormous potential in terms of culture, religion, economy, expertise, relations and experience. However, resignation and assimilation here and indifference and omission there have begun to drain the potential of Armenian life. In fact, the Diaspora has not been able to harness its potential and utilize it in an accurate way to its fullest. The organization and utilization of the potential of the Diaspora is a need. Such a huge plan requires collective and consistent work.”

In the two above-mentioned proclamations, after identifying­ the challenges faced by the communities and structures of the Diaspora, we emphasized that the lack of human resources in every area of Armenian life has begun to make itself felt. In other words, in every community, the number of expert people who are also experienced and­ accountable has begun to decrease gradually. This is a deeply worrisome development, both because of its global impact in the Diaspora and its­ unpredictable consequences. Indeed, human resources give vitality to our structures, reinforce the Armenian-centric existence of the Diaspora, preserve its national identity, and give it quality and direction; human resources that are intellectually and psychologically prepared, have acquired expertise and are fully dedicated. With this deep conviction, ­we ­declare 2024:

THE YEAR OF HUMAN RESOURCES PREPARATION

The Bible reminds us that on the sixth day of the creation of the universe, He created man (Genesis 1:26-27, 2:7). The creation of man was different from that of the other creatures of the universe, not only because of its timing and nature, but also its purpose. The Bible testifies that the man created in the “image of God” was called­ to be the caretaker of Creation­­, its defender, and the one who would enrich it (Genesis 1:28-30); in other words, God’s “collaborator” (1 Corinthians 3:9-17). What a sacred calling! But man betrayed his God-given ­calling, abused his privilege by using it for his pleasure and glory and was expelled­ from Paradise because of his disloyalty (Genesis 3).

However, God always kept watch over the sinful man­. God took his Only Begotten Son into the world to draw near to his Heavenly Father the man who had distanced himself. The Son of God became man, and he even shed his blood to reestablish man in his divine image and God-given ­devotion. This is the purpose and message of the Bible, the revelation of God­. The Bible stresses with particular importance man’s special place and unique role in the­ divine revelation and plan. Indeed, by way of different parables, events and teachings, in the Bible ­we see the ­­fatherly love and care­­ shown by God to man, even sinful man. Thus, for example, when the shepherd abandons his 99 sheep to seek the stray one ­(Matthew 18:11-14) and when the father welcomes his prodigal­ son with open arms ­(Luke 15:11–32). The Bible emphasizes that man and woman are a value for God. However, the value of man is not merely in his physical existence, but in his faithfulness­­­ and obedience to God­­.

All religions and civilizations have devoted special­ attention to man as a thinking, acting, ruling and enriching reality in the life of society with his creative spirit. For ancient philosophers, psychologists and sociologists, man has been the object of serious analysis­ and continues to be so in the present world ruled by technology. The history of nations shows the role of man behind every achievement, discovery and innovation. How central is that role in the life of the universe and the society! Countries, communities, societies­ and organizations develop, progress and grow not only with their wealth, political or military advantages and potential, but with the human resources that create, develop, govern and defend them.

* * *

We have pointed out, and we will again stress it, that there is a lack of human resources in ­Armenian life. Unfortunately, we often lack the courage and the wisdom to see and accept our shortcomings, our omissions and our weaknesses. We are inclined to see everything through rose-colored glasses, to cover up errors or to look elsewhere for the causes of mistakes. Religious ethics, as­ well as popular wisdom, remind us that accepting errors covers half the road to success. A general overview of our communities, organizations­­ and structures clearly shows that the lack of human resources increasingly deepens and grows, and its various and negative ­consequences become obvious. It is unacceptable to be indifferent to this worrisome situation. We all have something to do and give to address this major need in Diaspora life. We must be well aware that without human resources, our lives will lose their quality, will stagnate and fade, and the roots of our existence will be weakened. The preparation of human resources is an urgent­ priority­.

Why is there a lack of human resources in the life of the Diaspora? What are the reasons? It is necessary to ask such questions and try to find answers with an objective approach. In the sense of human resources, Armenian life shows the following picture today: first, our current human resources do not generally address the needs and demands of the present times; second, an important part of our human resources either remains on the margins of Armenian life or out of Armenian life.

Present Involvement of Human Resources in Armenian Life

The first important step in the reorganization and empowerment of the people should be to involve our human resources who are far from the mainstream of Armenian life.

Let us look around for a moment. It is true that we have specialists in many fields, but many of them are far from our lives. We have educated young people, but many do not participate in the activities of our structures. We have devoted teachers, but many work in non-Armenian educational institutions. The enumeration of human resources who are outside Armenian life for one reason or the other can go on and on…In the face of this sad reality, one must ask why an important part of our human resources have moved away from our community life. The questions should lead us to a diagnosis, and the diagnosis, to correctives. In every case, our approach should be realistic, not sentimental; practical, not theoretical; local, not general. We must consider the geopolitical conditions of every area of the Diaspora and the internal movements often derived from them, the decline of some communities for economic reasons and the growth of others, the transformation of their character, the differences in their environmental conditions, etc. These continuing developments should be evaluated in light of the global culture that has permeated Armenian life. Naturally, the abovementioned events have had a negative impact on the displacement of human resources from Armenian life and the migration from one community to another.

Along with the abovementioned external factors, internal and personal reasons have also driven some people away from our community life. Thus, we may mention the indifference sometimes shown by the local leadership or sometimes one-sided positions on issues affecting the community, competition inside institutions, incompatible approaches by the old and new generations, the lack of proper and worthy appreciation of human resources, as well as the desire of opening wider perspectives and securing a higher income, etc.

In the face of this worrying phenomenon, we do not want to blame either those who stay away or the institutions or people responsible for that. We want to stress firmly that, more than ever, it is imperative that the human resources who are far from Armenian life for different reasons should come closer, become participants in our collective experiences, struggles, plans and activities. We expect this firm determination and conscious commitment from those who stay away. At the same time, we expect from responsible bodies to create wide opportunities for our human resources and especially young people, involving them in our institutions and Armenian life in general. We love and respect our human resources. Therefore, it is not acceptable for our human resources to knock on other people’s doors, to serve others, to put their expertise and experience at the service of others’ success. For us, our nation, our Armenian homeland, our communities are what the priority is, what is essential, what is permanent.

Preparation of New Human Resources

The second important step in the organization and empowerment of human resources should be the preparation of new human resources. This is not an easy and smooth plan to be immediately realized. We must be realistic. The preparation of human resources presupposes a long-lasting process, complete dedication, serious organization, consistent work, as well as a large material investment. Look around you! States, religions, organizations and institutions carry out a huge amount of work and make a great investment, materially or otherwise, into human resources training. Indeed, without a conscious, specialized and dedicated person, what we have, from the material to the spiritual spheres, and from the educational to the political ones, has no value. Man is the one who gives it value, meaning, quality, direction and purpose.

The time has come now for us, starting from this awareness and determination, to focus our attention in the Diaspora on the preparation of human resources, fully utilizing our potential and resources. The preparation of human resources means to inculcate spiritual, moral and national values into Armenians, to acquaint them with the special events, figures and challenges of the past and present of our nation, to give them the possibilities to delve into the specialties of the present world, and above all this and giving meaning to all of this, to instill the spirit of serving our people with complete dedication, to bring their active participation into Armenian life.

How can the Diaspora be driven to training human resources with an organized approach and renewed momentum? We must keep in mind that the preparation of human resources is not only the work of a given institution, but it is a collective endeavor and a continuous process, involving various stages and initiatives. We want to briefly point out those institutions and resources that can bring an important contribution to the mission of human resources preparation.

1) The main and lasting anchor of a person’s preparation is the FAMILY. The solid foundation of the formation of an Armenian person is laid within the family. We learn a lot from our parents by listening and seeing. It is not only knowledge about our nation that we learn from our parents, but also and especially the spirit of being a conscious and proud Armenian and the dedication to serve our nation, homeland and church unconditionally. Hence, it is necessary for the Armenian family to emphasize its unique role in the preparation of human resources. To carry out this very important mission with dedication, the Armenian family must stay away from circumstances that can degrade its moral atmosphere and Armenian character and debase its high calling.

2) The second place of human preparation is the CHURCH. The church is the storage furnace of our spiritual, moral and national values and the source of revitalization. Many of the great figures of our nation have immersed themselves in the life and testimony of the church and received the zeal and commitment to serve the nation and the motherland from the church. Through various undertakings (Sunday school, Bible studies, popular lectures, Christian teaching, etc.), it is necessary for our church, along with its spiritual mission and national service, to give a boost to its teaching and educational work.

3) The goal of the THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY of our Holy See continues to be the formation of clergy, teachers and intellectuals imbued with spiritual values and called to serve the nation and the church. In this sense, the Seminary has done a great job in the last decades. Indeed, the presence of many people who have passed through the Seminary and have made important contributions to the religious, educational and cultural areas of our national life in Armenia and the Diaspora is an eloquent testament to the Seminary’s unique mission.

4) THE ARMENIAN SCHOOL is naturally one of the most important institutions in the preparation ­of human resources. Unfortunately, certain indifference towards the Armenian school has begun to emerge today among our parents. The Armenian school contributes greatly to the preparation of human resources with its successful record in official examinations, with the Armenian education and atmosphere it offers. Therefore, it is necessary ­to emphasize the formative mission of the Armenian school, supporting its programs ­­that contribute to it.

5) ALL INSTITUTIONS within Armenian life—political, charitable, cultural, sports, social and others—are, in their own way, special schools for the preparation of human resources. Indeed, their internal atmosphere full of national and cultural values, as well as their voluntary work to serve the needs of our communities, contributes to the preparation of human resources. There are Armenians who, for different reasons, have not attended Armenian schools, but by being part of community organizations, they have acquired an ample knowledge of Armenian life and the spirit of serving the nation has taken root in them.

6) The ARMENIAN STUDIES COURSES have a significant role in the development of human resources. Today, in fact, the only organized Armenian Studies Center in the Diaspora operates within the Catholicosate. We also must remember the Armenian Studies courses at the Karen Jeppe School in Aleppo and the Haigazian University. After 15 years of organizational development, the Armenian Studies Center of the Catholicosate operates in a more organized and self-confident manner, offering a wide range of subjects and the presence of experienced teachers invited from Armenia and the Diaspora.

7) The PEDAGOGICAL CENTER that operates within the Catholicosate, which trains teachers with new pedagogical methods, is of particular importance within this field. Its more than 35 years of activity and its cumulative success in state examinations show that its extensive work in the field of pedagogical training remains key.

8) Apart from the above-mentioned community structures for the preparation of human resources, we consider UNIVERSITY EDUCATION an essential, as well complementary part of preparation of human resources. Today’s world is a world of specialization. In fact, there is no longer a place for an amateurish approach to issues, developments, crises and plans in all aspects of society’s life. As much as dedication and preparation are necessary, specialization is just as necessary. Currently, higher education institutions and possibilities have multiplied. In light of the many resources offered by technology, university education has become more accessible, if not materially, in terms of time and work. Our young men and women who are eager to learn must profit as much as possible from the benefits offered by higher and professional university education.

Naturally, living in different conditions, we cannot expect the new generation to pass through the mentioned phases of human resources formation. Self-teaching also gives an opportunity and can have its important contribution in the formation of a person. In all cases, it is imperative that the young Armenian men and women, imbued with spiritual, moral and national values and armed with professional education, make themselves valuable in Armenian life, putting their education in the service of the development and empowerment of our nation. The Diaspora urgently needs human resources. Therefore, the preparation of human resources for the Diaspora should become a priority.

Practical Recommendations

We would like to make the following practical recommendations following the concerns, possibilities and points we have stressed regarding human resources preparation:

1) Despite the difficult conditions and limited resources of the Diaspora, huge work has been done in the field of human resources preparation. We express our high appreciation to all those dedicated to the sacred mission of educational and Armenian formation. The time has come for a more inclusive, coordinated and updated work by the institutions devoted to human resources training in our community life. In this sense, it is essential to do special planning work with the participation of the leaders of these structures, to avoid duplication and omissions.

2) We see an urgent need for gathering human resources within the communities. The gathering can be done in two stages. The first one involves the human resources participating in the community, and in the second stage, the human resources that have remained outside the community get involved.

3) In any case, it is necessary to organize all gatherings with a clear agenda. It is necessary to listen to the points of view, concerns and suggestions of those present, and then together determine a common direction for the empowerment of the community, specifying the priorities and dividing the work.

4) Special attention must be paid to the participation of young men and women, especially university students and graduates.

5) On certain occasions and even gradually, it is necessary to organize gatherings that bring together the community’s human resources, to discuss general plans that pertain to the community as well as concerns and challenges that concern the Diaspora and the Armenian nation.

6) A comprehensive list of a community’s human resources is essential. It should include basic information to exchange with other communities and have a comprehensive picture of human resources in the Diaspora.

7) It is advisable that the executive bodies of prelacies, political parties, educational, youth, cultural, charitable and other organizations participate actively in the abovementioned important works.

8) As we mentioned, the preparation of human resources also requires material commitment. In this collective effort, our wealthy fellow Armenians should feel obliged to make an important contribution in this direction, by establishing funds or by allocating annual benefits, in general, to programs devoted to human resources preparation and in particular to those structures that serve the same purpose.

9) Our prelacies and structures should allocate an important place on the agenda of their activities to initiatives and activities related to human resources training.

It will be the task of our human resources to conceive, plan and execute the work of reorganizing and revitalizing the Diaspora. This is how important human resources are for us and, therefore, how imperative and urgent is the preparation of human resources.

With these thoughts and expectations, we greet you with warm fatherly love, and we assure you that the Catholicosate of the Great House of Cilicia is always ready to support and participate in the sacred mission of human resources preparation.

With patriarchal blessings,

Prayerfully­,

ARAM I, CATHOLICOS
GREAT HOUSE OF CILICIA

January 1, 2024
Antelias, Lebanon

President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev during the interview on Jan. 10, 2024 (Photo: Office of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan)

YEREVAN—Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has called Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev’s recent provocative statements damaging to the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace process.

In a January 10 interview, Aliyev unveiled a comprehensive strategy that encompasses political alignment with Moscow, territorial demands against Armenia, and a dismissal of historical maps, marking a significant shift in the region’s geopolitical landscape. 

These remarks prompted a strong response from Pashinyan. “I consider Baku’s latest statements a serious blow to the peace process,” Pashinyan said on January 13. He highlighted the importance of the border delimitation process, emphasizing that its goal is not to create a new border but to reproduce the borders that existed at the time of the Almaty Declaration of 1991. Pashinyan accused Azerbaijan of attempting to form territorial claims against Armenia.

President Aliyev’s recent call for an unhindered road through Meghri, Armenia, has raised eyebrows, underscoring a deepening political alliance with Russia. During the January 10 interview, Aliyev reiterated his demand for a corridor without border controls passing through southern Armenia and insisted that the route should be monitored by Russian soldiers. Aliyev’s emphasis on the need for Russian control adds complexity to the geopolitical landscape in the South Caucasus and is seen as a Turkish-backed project by Ani Avetyan of the Voskanapat Analytic Center.

Aliyev has rejected Armenia’s proposal to use Soviet-era maps from 1975 as the basis for negotiations, challenging the foundation of diplomatic talks. Azerbaijan has asserted its unwillingness to retreat from territories occupied during the 2021 conflict, hinting at potential expansionist ambitions. The Azerbaijani leader’s historical revisionism, dismissing maps predating the 1970s, has wider implications for the negotiation process.

Armenia faces challenges in navigating the intricate geopolitics of the South Caucasus as Azerbaijan’s strategic realignment and territorial aspirations unfold. The international community is closely watching for potential consequences stemming from these evolving dynamics.

President Aliyev’s recent three-hour interview, marking the beginning of his pre-election campaign, provided insight into his views on ongoing Armenian-Azerbaijani negotiations. Varuzhan Geghamyan, a scholar of Turkish history, highlighted 10 key points that underpin Aliyev’s strategy:

• Border Ambiguity: The proposed “peace treaty” avoids specifying the border between Armenia and Azerbaijan, potentially enabling Azerbaijan to violate the agreement at any time without a defined border.
• Territorial Retention: Azerbaijan will not release internationally recognized territories of Armenia occupied after November 2020, dismissing the idea of a “mirror withdrawal of troops” proposed by Armenia.
• Unilateral Agreement: Azerbaijan aims to sign the document without an international intermediary, allowing for potential violations without international complications.
• Blockade Continuation: Azerbaijan plans to maintain a complete blockade of Armenia and will not open the border, aligning with Turkey’s position.
• Village Liberation: Azerbaijan insists on retaking eight villages inside Armenia’s borders as enclaves it claims are currently occupied by Armenia, demanding mini-corridors to the enclaves for Azerbaijani inhabitants.
• Syunik Corridor: Azerbaijan seeks a corridor through the Syunik province of Armenia, specifically through the town Meghri, as the “shortest and most convenient way” to its exclave Nakhichevan.
• Capture of Leaders: Aliyev expresses intent to capture former presidents Serzh Sargsyan and Robert Kocharyan.
• Turkic Place Names: Aliyev consistently uses Turkic place names for Armenian areas, reflecting a broader effort to shape Azerbaijani societal perceptions.
• Confidence in Gas Supply: Azerbaijan, a key gas supplier to the European Union, asserts confidence in managing Western pressure, emphasizing the need for strategic dealings with Russia.
• Peace Treaty Manipulation: The interview suggests that Azerbaijan may not seek peaceful coexistence with Armenia, viewing the “peace treaty” as a manipulation to weaken Armenian resistance. Concessions from Armenia on these points may lead to further demands from Azerbaijan and Turkey, reminiscent of the dangers faced by Syunik and Jermuk after concessions on the Artsakh issue.

Artak Zakaryan, a member of the executive body of the Republican Party of Armenia (RPA), expressed strong opposition to Aliyev’s recent declaration that Yerevan and Jermuk belong to Azerbaijan. In an interview with ABC media, Zakaryan highlighted that the issue of the right to self-determination of the people of Artsakh can only be considered closed by adhering to international norms and legislation.

Zakaryan emphasized that, according to international legislation, illegal actions have taken place against the people of Artsakh, including ethnic cleansing, forced displacement and risks of genocide. He urged the governing authorities of Armenia to approach the problem from the perspective of protecting their own interests rather than justifying Aliyev’s illegal demands.

The RPA official said the Armenian people should not be criticized for expressing their historical memory and accused the authorities of giving Azerbaijan the opportunity to make territorial claims against Armenia, referring to “Western Azerbaijan,” an irredentist concept used by Azerbaijan against Armenia. Zakaryan cautioned that such actions risk handing over the Republic of Armenia on a platter or, at the very least, preparing the ground for phased actions.

“[Armenians] patiently wait and hope that something good can happen from the conspirators, but it won’t happen. There will be deception, new losses, new victims, attempts at groundless explanations, searches for new culprits in other places, and an extension of one’s own infamous power,” Zakaryan said.

As tensions rise over territorial claims, the concerns of the people of Armenia regarding Azerbaijan’s assertions and the region’s stability increase.

Tatev Hayrapetyan, an expert on Azerbaijan, provided insight into the Armenian government’s reaction to Aliyev’s statements. Hayrapetyan argued that propaganda sites and expert circles close to Pashinyan are attempting to downplay Aliyev’s speech as connected to pre-election events. However, she emphasized that Aliyev’s statements have been consistent over the past year, indicating a more profound and longstanding plan for the occupation of Armenian territories.

Hayrapetyan urged the removal of Pashinyan and his team as essential to prevent the danger of war and maintain regional stability. She criticized the Armenian authorities for remaining silent and making concessions instead of presenting Azerbaijan’s policies to the international community, emphasizing that the de facto dictatorial regime in Baku is becoming a real threat to regional stability.