How do they differ?
We often repeat that parties are our national wealth. Everyone, without exception, starting from the oldest up to the ones existing for three months. Especially the parties, which despite their mistakes and failures have passed some historical path along with our people. Let’s give credit for our traditional structures, trying, however, to understand what role they are playing in Armenia and the Diaspora.
Perhaps, it would be correct to assume that any political party is created and operates to participate in the country’s political life. Does it take place with the Armenian parties? Does any one of them, for example, conduct pre-election campaign in the Congress of the United States, or to have a seat in the parliament of any other country? It seems that the answer is plain. Their activity is limited to the colony. The phenomenon is very accurately described by Hakob Paronyan: there is a constitution, there is a parliament, there are deputies, but all of these is unreal and slightly ridiculous, because it functions not by a state, but only a community scale.
Consequently, preservation of the Armenian identity and lobbying activities are left to the traditional parties of the Diaspora. Thanks to them, we must say that, during their existence, they have done a lot for the establishment of cultural, educational, sports, health care facilities in the colonies, they have raised the issues of the Armenian Cause to the public of the various states. However, the activities were always associated with internal provincial bickering, which is specific to communities and emigrants, which sometimes turns into blood. The preservation of Armenian identity is extremely “politicized”, in the result of which, let’s say, Dashnaks and hnchaks are not only treated in different hospitals, taking their children to different schools and playing in different football teams, but also attend different churches.
Read also
As for lobbying, its vivid example was demonstrated recently by the ARF Federation by presenting our authorities in Moscow and Washington, respectively, as a “pro-American” and “pro-Russian”, thus trying to “hound” two super states towards Armenia. It is a very “nation-beneficial” activity.
It is obvious that what the traditional parties, either good or bad, do in the Diaspora, is not applicable in Armenia (i.e. state availability). Here, the party can and should be engaged in purely political activities. But, unfortunately, sectored, “community” mentality still prevails, and exaggerated and unfounded claims are its negative manifestations. And the reason, apparently, is the dependency of the Armenian elite of those parties on the structures operating in the Diaspora.
Aram Abrahamyan
24.01.1995
