Armenian diaspora against peace with Azerbaijan Expert opinions on Caliber.Az

Influential Armenians in the United States seem to have taken issue with the news of a potential peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia. This was evident from the nearly simultaneous statements issued by two diaspora organizations under their control.

The Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) calls for “true peace” in response to reports of “a one-sided surrender”  imposed on Armenia by Azerbaijan. This was stated in a message from the Central Office of the ARF-D Bureau, "Hay Dat."

"The ANCA seeks a real peace – a just and enduring peace that respects the rights of the Armenian nation and ensures the return of Armenians to Artsakh – not a fake ‘peace’ – a one-sided surrender of Armenian security and sovereignty forced on Yerevan at the point of a gun," said Aram Hamparian, Executive Director of the Armenian National Committee of America.

Hamparian quotes the words of Secretary of State Marco Rubio: "The United States commends Armenia and Azerbaijan for concluding negotiations on a historic peace treaty. This is an opportunity for both countries to turn the page on a decades-old conflict in line with President Trump’s vision for a more peaceful world. Now is the time to commit to peace, sign and ratify the treaty, and usher in a new era of prosperity for the people of the South Caucasus."

He concludes that this statement was “premature, given the many obstacles to a just and enduring peace."

The second step was taken by the co-chairs of the Armenian Assembly of America (AAA), Oscar Tatosian and Talin Yacoubian. They sent a letter to U.S. President Donald Trump, urging him to take active steps to secure the release of “Armenian captives” “unlawfully” held in Baku, which would also ensure a “true peace” between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

So, there is a negative assessment of the situation from one Armenian-American organization and plaintive appeals to Trump from another structure of the same diaspora. Can such a radical position from a wealthy overseas community influence the Armenian authorities' ability to pursue a course toward peace with Azerbaijan? Will Pashinyan’s team succumb to this pressure? And why, in the first place, are Armenian Americans unhappy about the news of a potential signing of the long-awaited peace treaty with their neighbours?

These questions were answered by well-known experts on Caliber.Az.

Abraham Shmulevich, an expert on the Caucasus, the Islamic world, and the Middle East, and the head of the Eastern Partnership Institute (Jerusalem), noted that the Armenian community in the U.S. is quite wealthy.

"They have positions in various types of businesses. They are well-organized and have some influence on the U.S. government, Congress, and so on. They live in concentrated areas in states like California, which is also important for influence. The concentration of a certain emotional minority, members of a single diaspora, in this state can influence its politics. And California, as is known, is one of the key American states, where in the past, Armenian communities there achieved some political successes in their fight against Türkiye and Azerbaijan.

On the other hand, this is a fairly radical community. It is even more radical than the government of the Republic of Armenia itself. This is, again, due to the fact that a significant portion of Armenians in the U.S. are descendants of refugees from Türkiye following the events of 1915. They consider themselves victims of 'ethnic cleansing' and have a desire for revenge. Moreover, we remember that the American Armenian community has often taken more radical positions than, I repeat, Armenia itself. American Armenians supported the ASALA terrorists, actively participated in the First Nagorno-Karabakh War, and there were volunteers from the U.S. So, they are more radical and support uncompromising organizations against Türkiye and, accordingly, against Azerbaijan. Furthermore, they are far from Armenia and, therefore, think they are ready to fight to the last Armenian to achieve their goals. Unlike Armenians living in the Republic of Armenia, such as Pashinyan and other political figures, they do not bear political responsibility for the consequences of their actions," said the head of the institute.

According to him, the authorities in Armenia understand that their economic and military situation is quite dire, and they cannot withstand Türkiye and Azerbaijan in a direct military confrontation.

"They have come to this realization. The authorities in Armenia live in the real world and understand that the only way out of the situation they find themselves in is some form of normalization of relations with Türkiye and Azerbaijan. And, again, the authorities in Armenia have understood, and a significant portion of the Armenian society as well, that their hopes for Russia have been in vain. However, American Armenians do not live in such a reality, which is why they continue to be trapped in the myth that they need to fight to the last Armenian – while remaining in America and providing some financial and political support from there.

Moreover, there is another aspect. In Armenian society, there is a distinct division between Western and Eastern Armenians. The Western Armenians, those who lived in the Ottoman Empire, were the leading force in Armenian society before their uprising in 1915 against Türkiye. And now, I have encountered this opinion in conversations with Western Armenians: they believe that Eastern Armenians and Armenians of the Republic of Armenia occupy a leading position in the Armenian world unjustly. This, apparently, also explains their opposition to the steps taken by Pashinyan," detailed Shmulevich.

As political scientist and professor at the Western Caspian University, Fikrat Sadikhov, pointed out, the various nonsense and mythical statements from representatives of the Armenian diaspora have always been the main focus of their anti-Azerbaijani activities.

"Previously, we were accused of suppressing the freedom of expression of Armenian separatists who declared the so-called 'Republic of Artsakh' on our territory. And today, they accuse Baku of allegedly trying to create tension in the region by prosecuting those accused of war crimes.

It is interesting to consider how civilized countries would act if separatism were to raise its head in Europe or America? I believe the example of Catalonia in Spain is a clear confirmation of how Western governments deal with separatism within their own territories," the professor reminded.

It is clear, he says, that the wealthy Armenian diaspora in the West is not interested in agreements being signed between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

"And if they have any minimal positive attitude towards this, it is only to safeguard the interests of Armenia alone.

But overall, a peace treaty would actually strip them of their previous leverage, because if an agreement is signed between Azerbaijan and Armenia, peace and stability will come to the region, which does not suit the wealthy Armenian circles in America. How would they then influence the region, Armenia, and the forces that rely on them? That is why their statements and this course they have taken, as well as their appeals to officials in Washington, are understandable.

I don't think U.S. officials will take this talk very seriously. Therefore, their efforts will most likely be in vain. Their desire to create a new hotspot of tension in the region shows that the loss of their positions and influence has a very strong effect on their decision-making and the demonstration of their stance," concluded Sadikhov.