A matter of pathos with Vahan Zanoyan

Vaհe H Apelian

I was disturbed to read Vahan Zanoyan headline his latest article as “parallels between the ‘Real Armenia Ideology’ and the Soviet and Turkish approaches to the Armenian Diaspora.”  But, I am not going to comment whether there is a historical justification for such a parallel. I will simply dwell on Vahan Zanoyan’s take on the PM’s ideology which the PM has packaged as Real Armenia Ideology for public consumption. 

Recently the term pathos was used in a debate in the National Assembly. I will make use not only of that term but also its counter term logos. Vahan Zanoyan has led a stellar professional career.  I imagine that throughout his career his logos overrode his pathos. That is to say, the appeal to logic, the use of facts, data, and reasoning, overrode his emotions, and sentiments to chart the course of the companies he led or advised. While logos targets the mind, pathos targets the heart. It is said that logos and pathos, may best work in tandem. Vahan Zanoyan is also a writer. He has published two Armenian poetry books and four novels in English. I have read one of his novel. But when it comes to Armenia, Vahan Zanoyan’s pathos seems to override his logos for Armenia.

I quote the crux of the matter as he words it. He wrote, “I will focus on only one central tenet because it (read REAL ARMENIA) pertains to this issue, namely, equating the motherland with, and restricting it to, the current internationally recognized Armenian state — i.e., the 29,743 sq kms, a map of which the prime minister likes to wave while expounding on the new “ideology.” Everything that falls outside that area is officially excluded from the concerns and responsibilities of the state and is not considered to be part of the motherland.”

His quote chagrins me. I thought that a man of his experience will understand and support the PM whom the citizens of Armenia elected to assure that the 29,743 sq km of the Armenian real estate is not violated and that those who live on that real estate lead an orderly, secure, peaceful, prosperous lives.

What also surprised me is his – Vahan’s - view, if not his belief, that the Republic of Armenia is a depository of Armenian national aspirtations. He is genuinely disturbed that the PM does not act as the guardian of our national aspirations. I was NOT expecting Vahan to have such genuine revulsion at the PM Nikol Pashinyan’s relentless espousing “real Armenia ideology”. On the contrary, I was expecting that he will publicly support the PM’s ideology at this existential junction. The fact of the matter is that the State of Armenia is not a depository of Armenian national aspirations. The State of Armenia is the depository of Armenia’s policies, both internal and foreign to achieve just that, “the 29,743 sq km of the Armenian real estate is not violated and that those who live on that real estate lead an orderly, secure, peaceful, prosperous lives.”

Patriotism is said to be “the emotional attachment, love, and devotion a person feels toward their country or homeland. It involves a sense of loyalty, pride in cultural or political traditions, and a willingness to prioritize the nation's well-being and, in some cases, make sacrifices for its betterment.” Surely, patriotism transcends race. For example, I believe it to be true that “many people in Mexico, along with Mexican-Americans, believe the United States "grabbed" or stole massive amounts of territory (over 1 million square miles) from Mexico during the 19th century,” including the territory that makes the State of New Mexico that was ceded to the U.S. and officially became the 47th U.S. state on January 6, 1912.  I have not read Mexico’s Declaration of Independence, nor its Constitution. But I am sure these two documents that form the basis of the governance of Mexico do not allude to Mexican territories “grabbed” by the United States. 

 If the motherland that Vahan Zanoyan is alluding is historical Armenian lands, he must be aware that for understandable reasons, the principals of the Armenian Statehood have not rendered a claim for anything that is outside the State of Armenia since we established a Free and Independent State on May 28, 1918, to this very day. Vahan Zanoyan may fault the PM Pashinyan for being blunt to that reality. I, on the hand, appreciate the PM’s bluntness, to tell what it is and has been throughout Armenia’s statehood and not be pretensious. I go further and state that any opposition in Armenia to the PM’s Real Armenia Ideology is false, simply because those in Armenia who verbalize against the Real Armenia Ideology, have been proponent of that ideology, when they were in power and will continue to be, once in power.

 Since I alluded to Mexican Declaration of Independence (DOI). I read that it claims independence from the harsh Spanish rule. The American DOI alludes to throwing the yoke of the unfair King of England. Armenia’s Declaration of Impendence has no such wording There is not a single word from what Armenia declared independence and why. Without elaborating further, I say amend the poorly worded and hastily written and evasive Soviet Socialist Republic era Armenian Declaration of Independence, especially its preamble and be and remain truthful to its wording. Armenia’s governance and policies should be a true reflection for attaining the ideals Armenia espouses in its Declaration of Independence. 

As to the Armenian national aspirations, it is the subject that constitutes the core of our existence both in Armenia and in Diaspora and surely is beyond the scope of this blog.