Alec Yenikomshian

See also: The Looming Demographic Catastrophe, The Ruling Regime and the Question of Armenia’s Future Existence - Part I

The Looming Demographic Catastrophe

2. Tendencies in the Diaspora Today, it is widely held that there are some 10 million Armenians living throughout the world, of which 30-35% live in the homeland (Republic of Armenia, Artsakh and Javakhk) and the remaining 70% (comprised of the post-Genocide, Soviet and post ROA independence diaspora) live outside their ethnic territories.

In reality, the estimation that there are some 10 million Armenians is self-deception at best. Just as the figure of 3.5 million living in the homeland is a fallacy, the estimation that 7 million Armenians live scattered throughout the world is also a self-deception, given a large portion of these can be considered not as Armenians, but at best, individuals of Armenian parentage.

The fact that they are ethnically Armenian plays no major role in their self-consciousness and is placed way back in some inner recesses. For example, the number of Armenians living in the United States is often cited as 1.5 million; sometimes even more. Suffice it to say that this number is an exaggeration.

The Armenian community in this country, formed from pre-Genocide and post-Genocide (until the 1970’s) immigration is, to a large extent, far removed from its Armenian identity and has been completely Americanized. To a very great extent, the Armenian community of France, estimated at 400,000 - 450,000, at best recollects its, or more correctly, the Armenian roots of its parents; nothing more. The same can be said of Armenians during the Soviet period that put down roots in various Soviet republics, particularly the Slavic ones.

The list of examples can be continued. Despite the fact that the 10 million estimate of Armenians is overblown, nevertheless, it remains a fact that there are many more Armenians living outside the homeland than in it. Regardless of the large extent to which the Genocide and its consequences have played in the formulation of this reality, it is a strange manifestation for any people, even more so for a nation with a state. In terms of the preservation of ethnic identity, the relatively larger numbers of Armenians living abroad rather than in the homeland is a very dangerous situation.

The fact that doesn’t need to be proved and which is clear to all, is that those individuals living outside the borders of their nation-state, outside their ethno-cultural area are unavoidably doomed to assimilation. The best example is the assimilation of the mentionned old Armenian communities of the diaspora.

The real number of diaspora Armenians will always drop (It can temporarily grow only due to the exodus of Armenians living in the homeland). It is a well known fact that the preservation of Armenian identity in the diaspora had been much easier for decades on end in countries of the Near and Middle East in comparison with the West.

This reality was conditioned by several factors of which the desire to remain free of and defended from influences of the local religious and cultural environment and milieu regarded as alien; the authority, not only in the narrow religious sense, officially granted to the Armenian Church, this the result of the institutional structure of countries in these regions; the relative concentration of the Armenian populace in these same countries and the superiority complex of many Armenians regarding certain Eastern cultures, while on the other hand, a certain inferiority complex regarding Western culture; and the absence of the feeling of necessity  to defend oneself against  “foreign” religion and culture in the West, etc.

The exodus from Armenian communities in the Near and Middle East to the West has been an unending process. For a long time, the reasons were the desire to leave an alien environment and to live in the relatively more favorable conditions afforded in the West.

The exodus of diaspora Armenians from the East to the West has, since the 1970’s, grown at incomparable rates due to civil and inter-governmental wars and concerns stemming from the growth of radical Islam.

The flow of “eastern” diaspora Armenians, who preserved their Armenian identity to a much larger extent, to the West, continuously imparted a fresh Armenian breath to the fading Armenian communities in these western countries. In reality, the activity of Armenian communities in western countries during the past 3-40 years can, to a large degree, be credited to it. If there was no such flow of Armenians to the West, we would have not witnessed such activity.

But just like the case of their predecessors in these countries, the assimilation of the second and, in many cases even the first, generation born to those of this relatively new flow, will be unavoidable as well. This is becoming more evident with each passing day.

The once vital communities of the Near and Middle East are already living out the last stage of their existence. The reason is the unending exodus begun during the previous decades towards the West and the fact that they have dropped below critical mass quantitatively. The old and once active Armenian community in Iran is in its death throes. Members of the community that at best numbers 30,000, continue to migrate to the West at fast rates, mainly to the United States; taking advantage of the “generous” possibilities afforded by a certain Jewish organization. In the same vein, the Armenian community of Lebanon, once the most vital, is quickly following in the same direction.

The exodus to the West, especially of young people, continues unhindered. Mixed marriages between Armenians and local non-Armenians, once a tiny number, is rising at geometric proportions and has eclipsed the number of marriages between Armenians for several years now.

Today, one can meet Armenians who cannot speak the language, a rarity in the past. One generation hence, in thirty years, there will be only memories of this once “Little Armenia” in the diaspora. Along with the weakening of the Lebanese-Armenian community, the neighboring Syrian-Armenian community, primarily based in Aleppo, will fade away as well. Here too, the exodus continues unabated.

Due to the weakening of these three communities and the even quicker dissolution of the Armenian community in Iraq, stemming from obvious reasons, what will remain of the once robust Armenian communities in the Near and Middle East in three or four decades will only be display samples.

The Armenians from these communities will temporarily revitalize the Armenian communities in the West, but like their predecessors they too will quickly assimilate and melt in the American melting pot. During the past two decades, due to objective and subjective conditions, the process of assimilation has quickened.

The time factor, the relocation of diaspora Armenian communities from the East to the West, the influence of global policies of cultural homogenization, etc, as well as the indecisiveness and confusion created in the diaspora regarding the preservation of Armenian identity and the reasons and factors for the necessity of such struggle are reasons for the quickening processes of assimilation.

Despite the fact that the estrangement of the diaspora is inevitable, nevertheless, it is still possible to prolong the process to a certain degree if the subjective influential factors assisting the preservation of Armenian identity successfully counter the objective factors. But instead, as mentionned, one can rather observe confusion and indecisiveness in this respect.

There are a number of reasons for this. With the halt of armed operations in 1985, demands of diaspora Armenians have been limited to the international recognition of the Genocide; a process that has become an end in itself, assuming an inert nature. The Artsakh movement and the subsequent liberation struggle, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the independence of Armenia, sparked much enthusiasm in active and not so active diasporan Armenian circles.

This enthusiasm, however, was never transformed into an organized and directed serious and practical participation in developments taking place in Armenia. The best example of this was the very limited participation of diaspora Armenians in the Artsakh liberation struggle, which also served as a litmus test to gauge the real level of patriotism of the diaspora. The contemptuous and obstructionist policies of the new authorities in newly independent Armenia regarding the diaspora and diasporan thought not only didn’t assist the building of bridges between the two but deepened the already existing rift.

The leadership of the traditional Armenian structures in the diaspora and their underlings directed the potential of the local communities primarily towards futile activities designed to ensure the reproduction of their positions of power. Compared with the real potential of the diaspora, only a small portion was invested in the homeland.

Relatively small numbers of diaspora Armenians, often individuals and small groups, carried out their national assignments in Armenia and Artsakh, often limited to charitable works, which, despite being praiseworthy, did very precious little in terms of advancing essential and qualitative changes and improving the moral environment. On the contrary, similar programs often involuntarily assisted the strengthening of positions of the reigning upper class in Armenia.

At the end of the day, the following situation has resulted over the course of the past twenty years for the Armenian diaspora. International recognition of the Genocide has practically become an end all objective, assuming an inert nature, which, besides not being creative, has lead to a certain weakening of enthusiasm.

On the other hand, the new reality created with the appearance of the new Armenian republic and Artsakh, was dictating the development of a new totality stemming from Armenian demands in the diaspora and the new reality, where each of these two would have its independence, but where the supplementary correlation between the two would be defined as well.

The incapability to create such a stratagem and to act in accordance with it assisted in the formation of new uncertainties within the ranks of diaspora Armenians when it came to the realm of objectives and practices.

Responsibility for this failure lies with the diaspora elite and the authorities in Armenia. In addition, instead of bringing Armenia and the diaspora close together, the latter repelled and repulsed overseas Armenians from the existing homeland by their stance, with all the consequences such a move entails.

As a result of all this, during the past twenty years, a dangerous psychological and conscious situation was gradually created in the diaspora (more correctly, among those Armenians not indifferent to the question of their Armenian identity) in terms of living an Armenian life and giving meaning to it, confusion, uncertainty, and a general condition full of unhealthy internal contradictory feelings.

Aside from being inherently negative, this condition assists the processes that result in large numbers of diaspora Armenians to distance themselves from all things Armenian. We know that the “new” diaspora has come to be added to the “Old” diaspora.

This “new” diaspora has been created from the exodus of 1.5 million Armenians during the past two decades (in addition to the hundreds of thousands who have left Azerbaijan and Georgia), mainly towards Russia, but also towards the United States, Europe and elsewhere. All the observations and facts verify that these new diasporan communities, with rare exceptions, make almost no effort to retain their Armenian identity. The majority don’t even make an effort to teach the new generation Armenian.

For a while they maintain their link with Armenia, mostly via relatives who have stayed behind, but this link is eventually broken when and if the relatives also leave the country or parents pass away. Yes, it is important to raise the reasons for this fast paced withdrawal from Armenian life, but it will change nothing of the bitter truth. The “new” diaspora, comprised of those leaving Armenia, is also doomed to a quick demise.

Conclusion

The Armenian diaspora, old and new, is doomed to a quick dissolution. Despite the inevitability of this process, the diaspora Armenian elite and authorities in Armenia are partly responsible for its hastened pace during the past years.

The Armenian diaspora must be able to give new meaning and content to the struggle for its just historic rights, while at the same time consider itself just as responsible for the present and future of Armenia. This is both a right and obligation of a diasporan Armenian.

To turn ones head from the only existing Armenian homeland due to myriad of shortcomings or negative images seen in Armenia, or to use them as a pretext, is unacceptable behavior. Armenia, in turn, must accept diaspora Armenians as equal sons and daughter of this homeland and not as almost strangers, while at the same time respecting their characteristics and sensibilities.

The execution of this assignment is very important and necessary; but never sufficient. Rapid assimilation, or a bit slower, is the unavoidable destiny of the diaspora, and the demise of the diaspora, in such a way, will be an indescribable loss for the entire nation, given that a minority of the nation lives in the homeland. The only salvation for the diaspora is through repatriation.

This is also the salvation for Armenia as well because it represents one of the three conditions to avoid a demographic catastrophe – halting the emigration and raising the population’s natural growth rate. Can the repatriation of the Armenian diaspora, the guarantor of the continuity of Armenia and the Armenian nation, become a reality given current conditions? Sadly, no. Just as it never became a reality during the past twenty years, it cannot today, and will not for as long as Armenia is not the country where, first and foremost, Armenians residing in the homeland and then those from the diasporan can live and work in dignity as Armenians and humans, satisfying their material and spiritual needs.

That country, from which its own residents have fled and continue to flee due to the terrible conditions created by the ruling regime, can never serve as a country for repatriation.

To be continued (Next: The Ruling Regime)