Those who do not support Pashinyan?
In general, the label “marginal” does not evoke negative emotions in me. Depending on what the “mainstream” of a given society—or perhaps a given nation—is like, it is often preferable to choose the “margins.” For example, if the overwhelming majority of our nation is crazy about Dumikyan or Khcho, then I would prefer to be “marginal” and not listen to their songs. Or, if—say—70 percent of Armenia’s citizens are convinced that the St. Hakob Church in Stepanakert was recently demolished by the “former authorities” and the “Russian agents,” then I would rather remain on the margins and think that it was done by the Azerbaijanis, with whom we have “established peace.”
But it is obvious that politicians view “marginality” as something negative. Authorities in all countries tend to “push to the margins” those people or forces who disagree with them on one issue or another. A recent example is Trump. A few days ago, the U.S. president called the legendary rock musician Bruce Springsteen a bad and boring singer in response to the latter’s criticism.
Last week, Trump also attacked Pope Leo XIV, who, ironically, is American. Leo XIV offered a moral assessment of the war against Iran, which, I believe, is the duty of any clergyman. Trump’s response was roughly as follows (not a direct quote): who do you think you are, what do you understand about politics, why are you interfering in state affairs, and what about during Biden’s time… and so on. Although the word “marginal” was not used, that was precisely the implication.
Read also
Meanwhile, the Armenian government has officially declared certain figures and organizations in the Diaspora to be “marginal.” Presumably, those who do not admire that government. At the April 9 Cabinet meeting, Nikol Pashinyan spoke about these “marginals” without naming names. Who exactly is he referring to? Is it only the Dashnaktsutyun?
To answer that question, let me list the prominent Diaspora Armenians who had urged the Prime Minister of Armenia to abandon the intention of replacing the Catholicos. They did so in a perfectly respectful manner, yet provoked strong dissatisfaction from Armenia’s authorities—again, who do they think they are, they have no right to represent the Diaspora or speak on its behalf. (Incidentally, they did not claim to do so; they did not say, “we, the Diaspora.”) Are these people now “marginal”?
Let me recall who signed that appeal: Armenian-American businessman and philanthropist Noubar Afeyan; Co-Chair of the Board of Trustees of the Armenian Assembly of America Anthony Barsamian; Denham Professor Lord Ara Darzi; Armenian-American producer Eric Esrailian; Swiss-Armenian businessman and philanthropist Vatche Gabrelian; British-Armenian businessman and philanthropist Vatche Manoukian; CEO of Amber Capital Joseph Oughourlian; and the 7th President of the Armenian General Benevolent Union Berge Setrakian. Can the Armenian government determine the degree of their “marginality”?
Are the dioceses of the Armenian Apostolic Church in the Diaspora marginal? Are the Armenian Assembly, the Armenian General Benevolent Union, the Armenian Relief Fund, and, finally, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation marginal? Naturally, all these organizations have their shortcomings and can be criticized. But let the current authorities publish a list of non-marginal, “mainstream” individuals and organizations, and we will see whether all of them are flawless.
Fine, it is quite possible that some group within Armenia’s ruling circles considers Diaspora Armenians they dislike—or who dislike them—to be “marginal.” But if these officials are statesmen rather than blustering youngsters, they should keep such opinions to themselves and try to use the potential of these Diaspora Armenians to address national and state challenges.
If…
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
“Aravot” daily
13.04.2026
Image generated using artificial intelligence
