A native son of the USSR reflects

Բնագիրը կցուած է ներքեւը. Attached is my AI aided translation of Tatul Hakobyan’s reflection today on his Facebook page. It is indeed a cause for reflection when outcries are heard against the crossroad for peace initiative to forge peaceful relations with Armenia’s neighbors, even it means re-evaluating, re-examining and interpreting our age old entrenched  understanding of Armenia’s  history. Vaհe H Apelian

 

The Soviet Union consisted of republics that made the union, and of autonomous republics, autonomous regions, and autonomous okrugs.

All the 15 republics of Union of Soviet Socialist Republics became independent as a result of the collapse of the USSR. Armenia was the smallest republic of the union, in terms of territory.

The autonomous republics, autonomous regions, and okrugs were subordinate to the union republics, that made the USSR.

In Transcaucasia, there were:

Three union republics: Armenia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan.

Two autonomous republics: Nakhichevan (within Azerbaijan) and Abkhazia (within Georgia).

Two autonomous regions: the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast (within Azerbaijan) and South Ossetia (within Georgia).

It is regrettable that both in Transcaucasia and throughout the USSR, the only autonomous entity that does not exist today is Nagorno-Karabakh.

All autonomous republics, autonomous regions and okrugs that existed at the time of the collapse of the USSR, exist today, with one or another size and attributes of statehood / sovereignty/  administrative borders. And, most importantly, their people, whether as a minority or a majority, have been preserved. The only one is the Nakhichevan Autonomous Republic, where not a single Armenian remains.

Thus, we Armenians, who boasted that we destroyed the Soviet Union with the Karabakh movement, have lost Artsakh and the Armenians of Nakhichevan.

We can blame Turkey, Azerbaijan and Russia for losing Nakhichevan and Artsakh.

But I want to ask ourselves another question. How and why did all the autonomous republics, regions and okrugs remain; moreover, preserve their ancestral people, and only we Armenians were unable to do?

It's something to think about, something to think deeply about, even if you are irremediably convinced that your misfortune is the Russian, the Turk, and the Azerbaijani, doing.

Բնագիրը՝

 

Գեղջկական մտորումներ

Խորհրդային Միությունը կազմված էր միութենական հանրապետություններից, ինքնավար հանրապետություններից, ինքնավար մարզերից և ինքնավար օկրուգներից: 

Բոլոր 15 միութենական հանրապետությունները ԽՍՀՄ փլուզման ընթացքում և դրա արդյունքում անկախացան:

Հայաստանը միութենական հանրապետություններից տարածքով ամենից փոքրն էր: 

Ինքնավար հանրապետությունները, ինքնավար մարզերն ու օկրուգները գտնվում էին միութենական հանրապետությունների ենթակայության տակ:

Անդրկովկասում կային երեք միութենական հանրապետություններ՝ Հայաստան, Վրաստան, Ադրբեջան,

երկու ինքնավար հանրապետություններ՝ Նախիջևան (Ադրբեջանի կազմում) և Աբխազիա (Վրաստանի կազմում),

երկու ինքնավար մարզեր՝ Լեռնային Ղարաբաղի Ինքնավար Մարզ (Ադրբեջանի կազմում) և Հարավային Օսիա (Վրաստանի կազմում):

Ցավալի է, որ ինչպես Անդրկովկասում, այնպես էլ ամբողջ ԽՍՀՄ տարածքում միակ ինքավար միավորումը, որը այսօր գոյություն չունի, Լեռնային Ղարաբաղն է: 

ԽՍՀՄ փլուզման պահին առկա բոլոր ինքնավար հանրապետությունները, ինքնավար մարզերն ու օկրուգները, պետականության/ինքնիշխանության/վարչական սահմանների այս կամ այն չափերով ու ատրիբուտիկայով և ամենակարևորը՝ իրենց ժողովրդով, լինի փոքրամաասնություն կամ մեծամասնություն, պահպանվել են:

Ու միակը Նախիջևանի Ինքնավար Հանրապետությունն է, որտեղ չի մնացել գեթ մեկ հայ:

Այսպիսով, մենք՝ հայերս, որ պարծենում էինք, թե ղարաբաղյան շարժումով կործանել ենք Խորհրդային Միությունը, կորցրել ենք Արցախը և Նախիջևանի հայությունը:

Նախիջևանը և Արցախը կորցնելու հարցում կարող ենք մեղադրել Թուրքիային, Ադրբեջանին և Ռուսաստանին: 

Բայց ես ուզում եմ այլ հարց տալ մեզ. այդ ինչպես և ինչու բոլոր ինքնավար հանրապետությունները, մարզերն ու օկրուգները մնացին, ավելին՝ պահեցին իրենց տոհմիկ հայրենիքը և միայն մենք՝ հայերս չկարողացանք դա անել: 

Մտածելու բան է, խորը մտածելու բան, եթե անգամ անուղղելի համոզված ես, որ քո դժբախտությունը ռուսը, թուրքը և ադրբեջանցին են:

Թաթուլ. Հակոբյան

 

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year

Vaհe H Apelian 

A Sovereign Armenia

 Vaհe H Apelian

 

It is commonly understood that a sovereign state is an independent state that has the highest authority over its territory, on which its government is free to interact with other sovereign states.

When I was growing up, our teachers would tell us that we may not see a free and independent Armenia and that our children may not even see it happen, but one day Armenia will be free and independent. Meanwhile, our teachers told us, to study hard. Thus, I also grew up advocating for a free and independent Armenia. But I will have to admit that I REALLY did not envision what it REALLY takes to have a SOVEREIGN Armenia. At the time, it was more a pleasant dream than an understanding of the hard reality for having a country of our own, is all about. 

 An INDEPENDENT state is not necessarily a SOVEREIGN state.

Stateless we have been for centuries, independence and sovereignty seem to have converged in our minds and in our thoughts onto one, an independent state.  «Գերիշխան, պետութիւն” may not be viewed with the same comfort as “sovereign state” would in English, although both mean the same thing, using Armenian dictionary spelled words for sovereign and sovereignty.

During the recent years, the following historical events  will go down in history in conjunction of the re-establishment of a free and independent Republic of Armenia. 

On August 23, 1990, in collaboration with Nagorno Karabagh Oblast, Armenia wrote its Declaration of Independence. The document is known as Hrchagakir. When I read that document, I come across no mention as to why or for what reason the Soviet Socialist Armenia is declaring independence. But when I read the American Declaration of Independence, I read a litany of misdeeds the Crown committed that compelled the 13 colonies declare independence from the British Crown.

On September 21, 1991, almost thirteen months after the Hrchakagir, Armenians voted overwhelmingly (over 99%) in a national referendum to declare independence from the collapsing Soviet Union. 

On December 21, 1991, three months after the referendum, Armenia and the rest of the former soviet republics, save the Balkan countries and Georgia, met in Alma Ata and declared the Soviet Union dissolved and formed the Community of Independent States (CIS).

But Armenia’s foray into sovereignty began on May 8, 2018, when a popular bloodless revolution, called Velvet Revolution, led by Nikol Pashinyan and a group of younger Armenians changed the course and the order of the day and assumed power by a  snap parliamentary election that was cemented by a popular election seven months later. On December 9, 2018. Nikol Pashinyan led My Step Alliance was elected with absolute majority, 70% of the votes, while the two qualifying opposition parties had a combined 15% of the votes. The remaining 15% of the votes were cast in favor of parties that did not qualify to be in the National Assembly.

The newly formed government was tested in ways that could have incapacitated a government being unable to withstand the enormous responsibilities piled on It, and hold on to the rein of power, against a fierce opposition.  But Nikol Pashinyan government did. It turned out to be that it is made up of officials who are inordinately cohesive around shared core values they espouse. Also, and naturally thanks to popular support the government enjoyed. The Nikol Pashinyan government not only endured but also prevailed. The ruling Nikol Pashinyan government secured a second popular mandate. It had 54% of the votes during the post 44-Day war snap general election. While the two qualifying opposition parties had a combined 26% of the votes. The remaining 20% of the votes were cast in favor of parties that did not qualify to be in the National assembly.

A sovereign Republic of Armenia

Armenia’s INDEPENDENCE is not at stake. But Armenia’s SOVEREIGHTY is at stake. 

As students, we were also told that Armenia, has always been “AN APPLE OF DISCORD” -  կռուախնձոր/grvakhntsor -  between East and West. 

Decades later from those days, and more than any time in my lifetime, the confluence of what we were told, is zeroing on that the tiny, landlocked Armenia, the homeland for three quarter of us Armenians scattered worldwide. 

At the present, we are being tested whether we will be able to secure for ourselves and for generations to come a SOVEREIGN Armenia, the absolute culmination of our age-old aspiration.

 

 

 

 

A Sovereign Armenian Republic

Vaհe H Apelian

 

It is commonly understood that a sovereign state is an independent state that has the highest authority over its territory, on which its government is free to interact with other sovereign states.

When I was growing up, our teachers would tell us that we may not see a free and independent Armenia and that our children may not even see it happen, but one day Armenia will be free and independent. Meanwhile, our teachers told us, to study hard. Thus, I also grew up advocating for a free and independent Armenia. But I will have to admit that I REALLY did not envision what it REALLY takes to have a SOVEREIGN Armenia. At the time, it was more a pleasant dream than an understanding of the hard reality of having a country of our own, is all about. 

 An INDEPENDENT state is not necessarily a SOVEREIGN state.

Stateless we have been for centuries, independence and sovereignty seem to have converged in our minds and in our thoughts onto one, an independent state.  «Գերիշխան, պետութիւն” may not be viewed with the same comfort as “sovereign state” would in English, although both mean the same thing, using Armenian dictionary spelled words for sovereign and sovereignty.

During the recent years, the following historical events  will go down in history in conjunction of the re-establishment of a free and independent Republic of Armenia. 

On August 23, 1990, in collaboration with Nagorno Karabagh Oblast, Armenia wrote its Declaration of Independence. The document is known as Hrchagakir. When I read that document, I come across no mention as to why or for what reason the Soviet Socialist Armenia is declaring independence. But when I read the American Declaration of Independence, I read a litany of misdeeds the Crown committed that compelled the 13 colonies declare independence from the British Crown.

On September 21, 1991, almost thirteen months after the Hrchakagir, Armenians voted overwhelmingly (over 99%) in a national referendum to declare independence from the collapsing Soviet Union. 

On December 21, 1991, three months after the referendum, Armenia and the rest of the former soviet republics, save the Balkan countries and Georgia, met in Alma Ata and declared the Soviet Union dissolved and formed the Community of Independent States (CIS).

But Armenia’s foray into sovereignty began on May 8, 2018, when a popular bloodless revolution, called Velvet Revolution, led by Nikol Pashinyan and a group of younger Armenians changed the course and the order of the day and assumed power by a  snap parliamentary election that was cemented by a popular election seven months later. On December 9, 2018. Nikol Pashinyan led My Step Alliance was elected with absolute majority, 70% of the votes, while the two qualifying opposition parties had a combined 15% of the votes. The remaining 15% of the votes were cast in favor of parties that did not qualify to be in the National Assembly.

The newly formed government was tested in ways that could have incapacitated a government being unable to withstand the enormous responsibilities piled on It, and hold on to the rein of power, against a fierce opposition.  But Nikol Pashinyan government did. It turned out to be it is made up of officials who are inordinately cohesive around shared core values they espouse. Also, and naturally thanks to popular support the government enjoyed. The Nikol Pashinyan government not only endured but also prevailed. The ruling Nikol Pashinyan government secured a second popular mandate. It had 54% of the votes during the post 44-Day war snap general election. While the two qualifying opposition parties had a combined 26% of the votes. The remaining 20% of the votes were cast in favor of parties that did not qualify to be in the National assembly.

A sovereign Republic of Armenia

Armenia’s INDEPENDENCE is not at stake. But Armenia’s SOVEREIGHTY is at stake. 

As students, we were also told that Armenia, has always been “AN APPLE OF DISCORD” -  կռուախնձոր/grvakhntsor -  between East and West. 

Decades later from those days, and more than any time in my lifetime, the confluence of what we were told, is zeroing on that the tiny, landlocked Armenia, the homeland for three quarter of us Armenians scattered worldwide. 

At the present, we are being tested whether we will be able to secure for ourselves and for generations to come a SOVEREIGN Armenia, the absolute culmination of our age-old aspiration.

 

 

 

 

His Eminence Archbishop Khajag Barsamian: Armenia state and church relations:

 I have attached my AI aided translation of His Eminence Archbishop Khajag Barsamian’s reflection on the current church and state turmoil . The original was posted on December 13, 2025  in Keghart online journal and is linked below. Vaհe H Apelian

The Armenian people are living through a historic turning point. For the first time in centuries, we have a stable and independent Republic of Armenia. At the same time, about three-quarters of the Armenian Apostolic faithful, are scattered across the vast and diverse continents of the Diaspora, and are outside the borders of Armenia.

This new reality poses urgent and often confusing questions for each of us: what is the proper role of the Armenian Apostolic Church, and what is the proper role of the state?

Armenian identity and Christian faith are historically intertwined. Medieval Armenian authors often spoke of God and homeland, in the same breath. This bond helped the Armenian people to endure foreign domination, genocide, and disintegration.

However, what helped us survive in the conditions of statelessness can create confusion in the conditions existing in the modern republic.

Today, the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin is located on the territory of the sovereign Armenian state.

Today, the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin is located on the territory of the sovereign Armenian state. The Catholicos of All Armenians resides in Armenia. However, the majority of Armenians who perceive Etchmiadzin as their spiritual home live abroad. Is the Church in reality, the religious wing of the Republic of Armenia or is it a global spiritual body, serving all Armenians with a mission that cannot be limited to any one state?

In the Catholic world, the Holy See (Vatican) and the Italian State have clearly defined their relationship over time (Lateran Treaty, February 11, 1929). One is a spiritual center with a global reach, the other is a nation-state with political responsibility. Armenia faces the need for a similar clarification, adapted to our own history and circumstances.

However, it is not a political party and should not be one.

Such a clarification begins with several fundamental principles:

First, the Armenian Apostolic Church has a spiritual and moral mission, not a political one. Its main functions are the preaching of the Gospel, the celebration of the sacraments, the formation of conscience, the consolation of the suffering, and the preservation of Armenian Christian culture and memory. The Church has the right, and sometimes the duty, to speak out on moral issues affecting society: justice, corruption, dignity, war and peace, and the protection of the vulnerable. However, it is not a political party and should not be one.

the Republic of Armenia is a secular state. This does not mean an anti-religious state.

Second, the Republic of Armenia is a secular state. This does not mean an anti-religious state. It means a government that serves all citizens, believers and non-believers, followers of the Apostolic and other faiths, without imposing or enforcing any theology. The state is obliged to guarantee freedom of conscience, equality before the law, and the protection of human rights.

At the same time, mature secularism can recognize the special historical role of the Armenian Apostolic Church in the life of the nation and cooperate with it within clear legal boundaries in the spheres of education, social services, and cultural preservation.

Why are tensions so high in this case?

Both positions misunderstand the difference between party politics and moral witness.

One of the reasons is the formed expectations, born of another era. For centuries, when Armenia did not have a state, the Church was often the main structure of organized Armenian life: mediator, educator, advocate, diplomat. Some still expect it to continue that political role. Others, in response, demand that the Church remain completely silent on all public issues. Both positions misunderstand the difference between party politics and moral witness.

Another reason is politicization itself. 

Today, political actors sometimes try to use the symbols and language of the Church to advance their own agendas, or conversely, attack the Church to weaken their rivals. This damages both the spiritual credibility of the Church and the quality of democratic debate.

Finally, there are differences in perceptions between Armenia and the Diaspora. For many Diaspora-Armenians, the Church is their primary national institution. For many inside Armenia, it is just one institution, operating in a fragile and contested political environment. Without careful listening, these different experiences breed mutual frustration.

How to move from confusion to clarification?

There is one way: to follow, in our own way, the experience that other states and churches have gone through: to publicly define Church-State relations. 

This could mean:

Reaffirming the Church’s independence in spiritual and internal matters, affirming the secular nature of the Republic and its neutrality with regard to beliefs, recognizing by law the unique historical and cultural role of the Armenian Apostolic Church, establishing rules to prevent the use of church structures for partisan purposes, creating regular and transparent channels of dialogue between the state and the church leadership.

Armenian Christianity has always uniquely combined patriotism and piety. That heritage should not become a weapon of power struggle.

None of these alone resolves all contradictions. Disagreements continue, and must continue, in a free society. But it weakens the temptation to turn every dispute into an ontological struggle between “old Armenia” and “new Armenia” or “religion” and “progress.”

In a time of serious national challenges: security threats, social difficulties, mass emigration, and unresolved /spiritual/shocks, Armenia needs both a solid state and a credible church. The state should focus on justice, security, and the material well-being of its citizens. The church should focus on faith, moral formation, hope, and identity. They serve the same people, but in different ways.

Armenian Christianity has always uniquely combined patriotism and piety. That heritage should not become a weapon of power struggle. It should be a source of wisdom as we, perhaps for the first time, learn to live as citizens of a modern republic and as heirs of an ancient Christian people.

Clarifying the respective roles of Church and State in Armenia does not diminish anyone

Clarifying the respective roles of Church and State in Armenia does not diminish anyone. If properly implemented, it allows both to serve more honorably and effectively, preventing the abuse of both political power and spiritual authority. In this way, the Armenian people in the homeland and throughout the Diaspora can face the future with a clearer mind and a more steadfast heart. This important mission can be accomplished through a strong partnership between the leaders of Church and State, based on a moral vision that protects the well-being of our people both in the homeland and in the Diaspora.

Link: Հայաստանի եկեղեցի-պետութիւն յարաբերութիւնները պարզաբանում, եւ ոչ թէ հակամարտութիւն կը պահանջեն: https://keghart.org/archb-barsamian-church-state-relations/

 

 

 

Կէթիսպըրկի Ուղերձը

 Կցած եմ նախագահ Աբրահամ Լինքոլնի Կեթիսպըրկի ուղերձին թարգմանութիւնս։ Ուղերձը տեւած է մօտաւորապէս երկու վարկեան եւ բաղկացած է մօտաւորապէս 275 բաոերէ։ Բայց նախագահ Աբրահամ Լինքոլնի այդ ուղերձը կը համարուի Ամերիկեան պատմութեան մեջ ամէնայայտնի ուղերձներէն։ Թարգմանութեանս սրբագրութիւնը կը պարտիմ երբեմնի ուսուցչիս Արմենակ Եղիայեանին։  Վահէ Յ Աբէլեան

՚

Կէթիսպըրկի Ուղերձը

«Չորս քսանամեակներ և եօթը տարիներ առաջ մեր հայրերը այս ցամաքամասին վրայ յառաջացուցին նոր ազգ մը բեղմնաւորուած Ազատութեան մեջև նուիրուած այն առաջադրութեան որ բոլոր մարդիկ ստեղծուած են հաւասար։

Այժմ մենք բոնկուած ենք քաղաքացիական մեծ պատերազմի մը, փորձարկելու որ արդիո՞ք այդ ազգը, կամ որեւէ ազգ՝ այդպէս բեղմնաւորուած և այդպէս առաջադրուած կրնայ երկար տոկալ: Մենք կը հանդիպինք այդ մեծ պատերազմին մարտադաշտին վրայ: Մենք եկած ենք նուիրելու այդ մարտադաշտին մէկ մասը որպէս վերջին հանգստավայրը անոնց որոնք այստեղ իրենց կեանքերը նուիրեցին որպէսզի այդ ազգը կարողանայ գոյատեւել: Բոլորովին տեղին և պատշաճ է որ մենք այս ընենք:

Բայց աւելի խոր իմաստով՝ մենք չենք կրնար նուիրագործել - չենք կրնար սրբադասել - չենք կրնար սրբացնել այս հողը: Կենդանի և մեռած խիզախ մարդիկ որոնք պայքարեցան այստեղ, արդէն սրբացուցած են ան շատ աւելի բարձր քան մեր աղքատ ոյժը կարողանայ աւելցնել կամ նուազեցնել:

Աշխարհը քիչ ուշադրութիւն պիտի դարձնէ եւ ոչ ալ երկար ժամանակ պիտի յիշէ թե մենք ինչ կ՚ըսենք հոս, բայց երբեք պիտի չի կարողանայ մոռանալ այնինչ որ ըրին այստեղ: Ընդհակառակը` մենք ողջերս ենք որ պէտք է նուիրուինք այստեղ ամբողջացնելու իրենց անաւարտ գործը, որուն համար անոնք մաքարեցան հոս եւ ազնիւօրեն առաջ մղեցին:

Աւելի շատ մեզի համար է որ հոս ըլլանք նուիրուած մեր առաջ մնացած մեծ գործին – այստեղի պատուելի մեռելներէն մենք նուիրում ստանանք այն դատին՝ որուն համար անոնք տուին իրենց նուիրումին վերջին ամբողջական չափը – որ մենք՝  մեծապէս ուխտենք որ այդ մեռնողները ի իզուր մեռած չըլլան - որ այս ազգը, Աստծոյ ներքեւ ունենայ ազատութեան նոր ծնունդ մը  - եւ որ ժողովուրդին կառավարութիւնը, ժողովուրդին կողմէ, ժողովուրդին համար չի ջնջուի այս աշխարհէն:» 

Աբրահամ Լինքոլն

 

 

 

Vartan O. mobilizing the English language

Vaհe H Apelian

 

I just read Vartan Oskanian’s commentary in Horizon Daily, the bilingual Armenian newspaper in Canada and I was reminded of the following famed sentence, "He mobilized the English language and sent it into battle.” However, for brevity, I did not title this blog post, claiming that Vartan Oskanian is mobilizing the English language against prime minister Nikol Pashinyan and sending it to the wrong audience, and in the wrong language. Vartan Oskanian is not addressing the citizens of Armenia in Armenia, in Armenian.

Let me sort and structure my thoughts.

The movie “Darkest Hour”, is a dramatized documentary about Winston Churchill assuming the post of the prime minister of the British Empire during the Second World War. Almost right after he assumed the post, France fell to Nazi Germany, and the British had their army cornered on the Dunkirk beach.  It was also feared that the Nazi Germany would invade England, Churchill’s island nation and there was talk in his war cabinet for seeking terms with Hitler. But Churchill refused and gave a speech in the parliament claiming that the British “shall fight them on the beaches” and expected that everyone in his government is willing to die “chocking on his own blood upon the ground”. Lord Halifax, in his war cabinet was for seeking terms with the Nazi Germany through Mussolini. After the speech he uttered that sentence. But that was in the film. In real life the sentence is attributed to famous American journalist Murrow speaking about Churchill.

 Coming to Vartan Oskanian; it should be noted that he has good, if not an excellent command of the English language and he uses it expertly attempting to mobilize the diaspora. I imagine, other than a handful citizens of Armenia, no other citizen in Armenia reads Latin Armenian Diaspora press. I remain puzzled. If Vartan Oskanian seeks to constitutionally topple the Nikol Pashinyan government, he should be addressing the citizens of Armenia and not Diaspora; and address them in Armenian and not in English.

I suggest Vartan clarify the political goals he tacitly wants to convey and have them in easily understood slogans. Such as:

First:  “կը մերժենք Ալմա Աթայի համաձայնագիրը», 

That is to say Vartan, on behalf of the opposition, rejects the Alma Ata agreement or protocol. On December 21, 1991, former USSR republics (excluding the Baltics) met in Almaty, Kazakhstan, and officially dissolved the Soviet Union and established the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) consisting the former Soviet Socialist Republics. Nikol Pashinyan’s cross road for peace is based on that initiative, which Vartan objects

Second: “Վերադարձ Դէպէ Ղարաբաղ»

That is to say Vartan Oskanian, on behalf of the opposition declares that returning of the Artsakh Armenians to the Nagorno-Karabagh will constitute the cornerstone of his foreign policy, in contrast to prime minsiter Nikol Pashinyan, who has ruled that Artsakh/Karabagh issue has been resolved and is no more relevant to his government's foreign policy.

I would have suggested Vartan other platforms as well, such as «Պիտի Պահենք Էջմածինը այնպէս Ինչպէս որ է», that is to say Vartan Oskanian will have Etchmiazin continue to function as it has. 

Last, but definitely not the least, if not the foremost.  Once in power, Vartan Oskanian will have those who acquired wealth, privileges, monopolies, such as the electric grid of Armenia, keep their “hard earned” wealth, the crux of the matter, Vartan Oskanian is and has been advocating all along.