V.H. Apelian's Blog

V.H. Apelian's Blog

Friday, January 10, 2025

SCOTUS is a Legislating Body

Vahe H Apelian

 

The pictures courtesy NY Times.

The debate whether the SCOTUS interprets the Constitution or legislates has long subsided. The consensus that seems to have emerged is that the very interpretation of the Constitution is legislation. Consequently, we have seemed to have resigned or accepted it that the SCOTUS is a panel of 9 persons, educated in law who wear a black gown and  during the State of the Union, sit with a solemn face, do not clap to the president’s address and try to impart an image that they stand above partisan politics, when in fact it was the partisan politics that brought that to that exalted position.

The headlines of NY Times today were very much telling of the SCOTUS’s legislation.

The two headlines were the following

 The first headline heralded the following: A Rebuke to Trump Provides a Telling Portrait of a Divided Supreme Court.

The first sentence of the report summed the state of the SCOTUS. It read: “Two Republican appointees, Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Barrett, joined the court’s three liberals in ordering the president-elect to face sentencing on Friday.” That short sentence acknowledged that the appointees of the Supreme Court are judged by their inclination for narrow or more liberal interpretation of the Constitution and their decision has political implication and reflects the political divide of the country, whether they clapped at the State of the Union address or not. 

The appointment of the justices is political more than anything else. No wonder, President Obama was denied to appoint a justice when a vacant seat came about with the death of Antonin Scalia in February 2016, at the beginning of the presidential election year. The Republican majority in the Senate made it their stated policy to refuse to consider any nominee to the Supreme Court, arguing that the next president should be the one to appoint Scalia's replacement. in the SCOTUS. That seat ended up being filled during Republican Trump administration.

Less than two weeks after taking office, on January 31, 2017, Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch to fill Scalia’s former seat on the Supreme Court. The Senate, where Republicans maintained a majority after the 2016 election, confirmed Gorsuch less than three months later, on April 7, 2017.

Whether the president elect Trump should have faced justice should not be a cause for a divided SCOTUS. Why should the president elect, a citizen nonetheless, facing justice be a reason for division in the SCOTUS if not for political consideration? Presently the nine justices are sliced with a clean cut in two camps, six Republican leaning Justices and three Democratic leaning justices. 

                                                                    *** 

The other headline heralded the following: Justices seem Poised to Allow U.S. Tik Tok Ban. The Case Highlights Clash of National Security Concerns and Free Speech.

Tik Tok ban, in my view, is a security issue. SCOTUS should not be the body that rules whether Tik Tok should be banned or not. Of course it is a matter of free speech. The elected officials expressed their opinions without fear and concern for repercussion and for theirs safety and security, to galvanize the nation on an important ruling, whether to ban Tik Tok or not. 

I do not think that founding fathers had the speech of the Chinese in mind when they framed free speech in the U.S. Constitution. 

Imagine that some experts believe it is possible that Apple and Google could decide to not comply with the law, betting that President-elect Donald J. Trump, who has come out in support of TikTok, would direct his attorney general not to enforce it.

Let us face it folks, we are transition from a Republic to an emperorship by the new age meritocrats who have amassed hitherto unbelievable wealth and buy for themselves unbelievable power. Next to the SCOTUS, these select group of few individuals legislate the course of our lives.

Recalling Artsakh history: Remembering Samvel Shahramanyan's inaugural speech

This blog was first titled "From Arayik Harutunyabn to Samvel Shahramanyan, what changed?" It was posted on September 11, 2023, a day after Samvel Shahramanyan was sworn as the 5th president of Artsakh. I had noted that there does not appear to be a change in the fundamental policy of Artsakh which obviously is an existential matter. His inaugurals address focused on the fundamentals, which obviously are a matter of to be or not to be for Artsakh. However, 12 days of his inaugural address, Shahramanyan signed the total capitulation of Artsakh, lock, stock, and barrel, and the abduction of the Artsakh officials presently languishing in dungeons that are the Azeri prisons in Baku. The English translation of the quotes is Google's doing. Vahe H Apelian.

My first reaction to the change of leadership in Artsakh was my expectations that a major change of policy has taken place and that Russia asserted  itself as de facto master of the Caucasus with a Coup de Grâce.

But, has it been that? (http://vhapelian.blogspot.com/2023/09/lachin-corridor-test-of-wills.html)

During his inaugural address to the Artsakh National Assembly, the newly elected president Samvel Shahramanyan addressed the fundamental issues concerning Nagorno-Karabagh, the Lachin corridor, and Stepanakert-Yerevan relations and did not dwell on partisan politics.

First and foremost, the president Samel disputed Azerbaijan’s claim that there is no Nagorno-Karabakh issue any more and that the war has resolved the matter. He noted that it is not so and that the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, contrary to Azerbaijan’s claim, is not resolved and that it should have a status. 

I quote, the first point from his inaugural address:

“The Artsakh conflict is not settled, as Azerbaijan claims, therefore Nagorno-Karabakh is a disputed territory that should receive a certain status. (Արցախյան հակամարտությունը կարգավորված չէ, ինչպես պնդում է Ադրբեջանը, հետևաբար Լեռնային Ղարաբաղը հանդիսանում է վիճելի տարածք, որը պետք է ստանա որոշակի կարգավիճակ.”


         The president also noted that in no uncertain terms that Artsakh and Armenia should have a direct transport line and that there is no substitute to the Lachin corridor and that it should be open.  

I quote the second point he made in his inaugural address.

“Artsakh and Armenia should have a direct transport connection, the Lachin Corridor. Contrary to Baku's claims, the latter has been closed for a long time and should be opened. Other regional roads should also be launched, but they cannot replace the Lachine Corridor or be seen as an alternative to it. (Արցախն ու Հայաստանը պետք է ունենան ուղիղ տրանսպորտային հաղորդակցություն՝ Լաչինի միջանցք։ Վերջինս ի հակառակ Բաքվի պնդումների՝ արդեն տևական ժամանակ է փակ է և պետք է բացվի։ Պետք է գործարկվեն նաև տարածաշրջանային այլ ճանապարհներ ևս, սական դրանք չեն կարող փոխարինել Լաչինի միջանցքին, կամ դիտվել դրան այլընտրանք,)”

What was more revealing to me was the third point the new president of Artsakh made in the same inaugural address to the National Assembly of Artsakh noting that Stepanakert should negotiation with Baku. But he mentioned that along with the Russian Federation that there is a “collective west’ that is ready to provide a platform and act as mediator. I do not recall having read in the NA of Artsakh any reference to a “collective west”. I believe that these few words are very significant. 

I quote the third point he made in his inaugural address.

“Stepanakert should negotiate with Baku. Moreover, in this matter, both the Russian Federation and the collective West are ready to provide a platform and act as a mediator, which Azerbaijan is categorically against. (Ստեփանակերտը պետք է բանակցի Բաքվի հետ։ Ընդ որում, այս հարցում, թե ՌԴ-ն և թե հավաքական արևմուտքը պատրաստ են տրամադրել հարթակ և հանդես գալ միջնորդի դերում, ինչին կտրականապես դեմ է Ադրբեջանը:)”

Samvel Shahramanyan, also addressed Stepanakert and Yerevan relations, rather bluntly.

I quote: 

“Rethinking its security concept in the light of post-war realities, the Republic of Armenia actually backed away from its multi-year mission as the guarantor of Artsakh's security and adopted an approach called the peace agenda, the core of which is the recognition of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, including Artsakh, provided that the basic rights of Artsakh Armenians and freedoms.” (Հայաստանի Հանրապետությունը հետպատերազմյան իրողությունների հաշվառմամբ վերանայելով իր անվտանգային հայեցակարգը, փաստացի հետ է կանգնել Արցախի անվտանգության երաշխավորի իր բազմամյա առաքելությունից և որդեգրել է խաղաղության օրակարգ անունով մի մոտեցում, որի առանցքն է կազմում Ադրբեջանի տարածքային ամբողջականության ճանաչելը, ներառյալ Արցախը, պայմանով, որ ապահովված լինեն արցախահայության հիմնական իրավունքներն ու ազատությունները:)

Indeed, Armenia has changed its policy regarding Artsakh. Nikol Pachinyan pursues a policy of peace in the region and as far as Artsakh in Azerbaijan is concerned, I quote Dan Donabedian ““Armenia has never signed a piece of paper recognizing Artsakh as Azerbaijan. Instead, it said it would be willing to do so if and only if the rights and securities of Armenians had guarantees and protections under international assurances.” It is a conditional statement that the president of Artsakh echoes but it is not hard to imagine that Artsakh expects more from Armenia, only if the latter could deliver more.

The president Samvel’s statement has displeased some segments of the citizens of Armenian, not as a divergent policy matter, but simply because as citizens of Armenia, they have shouldered the well-being of Artsakh materially and by blood. It is claimed that 5 to 6% of the Republic of Armenia’s budget, that naturally comes from the taxes the citizens of Armenia pay, is devoted to Artsakh, which presents 1/30 of Armenia's population. We know the inordinate human cost the citizens of Armenia bear having a few thousand of their young sons martyred during the Artakh war/s. 

From Arayik to Samvel, for now, there does not appear to be a change in the fundamental policy of Artsakh which obviously is an existential matter. His inaugurals address focused on the fundamentals that are a matter of to be or not to be for Artsakh. 

I quote president Samvel Shahramanyan:

“Dear Members of Parliament, the essence of the vision presented to you can be summed up in the following brief formulation. strengthening the state and maintaining internal stability, protecting Artsakh's right to self-determination, ensuring its free life and security, promoting the country's economic development, gradually improving the social condition of the people and strengthening law and order. “Հարգելի պատգամավորներ՝ Ձեզ արդեն իսկ ներկայացրած տեսլականի էությունը կարելի է ամփոփել հետևյալ սեղմ ձևակերպմամբ. պետության ամրապնդում և ներքին կայունության պահպանում, Արցախի ինքնորոշման իրավունքի պաշտպանում, նրա ազատ կենսագործունեության և անվտանգության ապահովում, երկրի տնտեսական զարգացման խթանում, ժողովրդի սոցիալական վիճակի աստիճանական բարելավում և օրինականության ու կարգուկանոնի ամրապնդում։”

It is imperative that we read the newly elected president’s inaugural address to formulate an informed opinion for a constructive dialogue in the Diaspora.

 


Recalling Artsakh history: Remembering Samvel Shahramanyan's inaugural speech

This blog was first titled "From Arayik Harutunyabn to Samvel Shahramanyan, what changed?" It was posted on September 11, 2023, a day after Samvel Shahramanyan was sworn as the 5th president of Artsakh. I had noted that “there does not appear to be a change in the fundamental policy of Artsakh which obviously is an existential matter. His inaugurals address focused on the fundamentals, which obviously are a matter of to be or not to be for Artsakh. However, 12 days of his inaugural address, Shahramanyan signed the total capitulation of Artsakh, “lock, stock, and barrel” and the abduction of the Artsakh officials presently languishing in dungeons that are the Azeri prisons in Baku. The English translation of the quotes is Google's doing. Vahe H Apelian

My first reaction to the change of leadership in Artsakh was my expectations that a major change of policy has taken place and that Russia asserted  itself as de facto master of the Caucasus with a Coup de Grâce.

But, has it been that? (http://vhapelian.blogspot.com/2023/09/lachin-corridor-test-of-wills.html)

During his inaugural address to the Artsakh National Assembly, the newly elected president Samvel Shahramanyan addressed the fundamental issues concerning Nagorno-Karabagh, the Lachin corridor, and Stepanakert-Yerevan relations and did not dwell on partisan politics.

First and foremost, the president Samel disputed Azerbaijan’s claim that there is no Nagorno-Karabakh issue any more and that the war has resolved the matter. He noted that it is not so and that the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, contrary to Azerbaijan’s claim, is not resolved and that it should have a status. 

I quote, the first point from his inaugural address:

“The Artsakh conflict is not settled, as Azerbaijan claims, therefore Nagorno-Karabakh is a disputed territory that should receive a certain status. (Արցախյան հակամարտությունը կարգավորված չէ, ինչպես պնդում է Ադրբեջանը, հետևաբար Լեռնային Ղարաբաղը հանդիսանում է վիճելի տարածք, որը պետք է ստանա որոշակի կարգավիճակ.”


         The president also noted that in no uncertain terms that Artsakh and Armenia should have a direct transport line and that there is no substitute to the Lachin corridor and that it should be open.  

I quote the second point he made in his inaugural address.

“Artsakh and Armenia should have a direct transport connection, the Lachin Corridor. Contrary to Baku's claims, the latter has been closed for a long time and should be opened. Other regional roads should also be launched, but they cannot replace the Lachine Corridor or be seen as an alternative to it. (Արցախն ու Հայաստանը պետք է ունենան ուղիղ տրանսպորտային հաղորդակցություն՝ Լաչինի միջանցք։ Վերջինս ի հակառակ Բաքվի պնդումների՝ արդեն տևական ժամանակ է փակ է և պետք է բացվի։ Պետք է գործարկվեն նաև տարածաշրջանային այլ ճանապարհներ ևս, սական դրանք չեն կարող փոխարինել Լաչինի միջանցքին, կամ դիտվել դրան այլընտրանք,)”

What was more revealing to me was the third point the new president of Artsakh made in the same inaugural address to the National Assembly of Artsakh noting that Stepanakert should negotiation with Baku. But he mentioned that along with the Russian Federation that there is a “collective west’ that is ready to provide a platform and act as mediator. I do not recall having read in the NA of Artsakh any reference to a “collective west”. I believe that these few words are very significant. 

I quote the third point he made in his inaugural address.

“Stepanakert should negotiate with Baku. Moreover, in this matter, both the Russian Federation and the collective West are ready to provide a platform and act as a mediator, which Azerbaijan is categorically against. (Ստեփանակերտը պետք է բանակցի Բաքվի հետ։ Ընդ որում, այս հարցում, թե ՌԴ-ն և թե հավաքական արևմուտքը պատրաստ են տրամադրել հարթակ և հանդես գալ միջնորդի դերում, ինչին կտրականապես դեմ է Ադրբեջանը:)”

Samvel Shahramanyan, also addressed Stepanakert and Yerevan relations, rather bluntly.

I quote: 

“Rethinking its security concept in the light of post-war realities, the Republic of Armenia actually backed away from its multi-year mission as the guarantor of Artsakh's security and adopted an approach called the peace agenda, the core of which is the recognition of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, including Artsakh, provided that the basic rights of Artsakh Armenians and freedoms.” (Հայաստանի Հանրապետությունը հետպատերազմյան իրողությունների հաշվառմամբ վերանայելով իր անվտանգային հայեցակարգը, փաստացի հետ է կանգնել Արցախի անվտանգության երաշխավորի իր բազմամյա առաքելությունից և որդեգրել է խաղաղության օրակարգ անունով մի մոտեցում, որի առանցքն է կազմում Ադրբեջանի տարածքային ամբողջականության ճանաչելը, ներառյալ Արցախը, պայմանով, որ ապահովված լինեն արցախահայության հիմնական իրավունքներն ու ազատությունները:)

Indeed, Armenia has changed its policy regarding Artsakh. Nikol Pachinyan pursues a policy of peace in the region and as far as Artsakh in Azerbaijan is concerned, I quote Dan Donabedian ““Armenia has never signed a piece of paper recognizing Artsakh as Azerbaijan. Instead, it said it would be willing to do so if and only if the rights and securities of Armenians had guarantees and protections under international assurances.” It is a conditional statement that the president of Artsakh echoes but it is not hard to imagine that Artsakh expects more from Armenia, only if the latter could deliver more.

The president Samvel’s statement has displeased some segments of the citizens of Armenian, not as a divergent policy matter, but simply because as citizens of Armenia, they have shouldered the well-being of Artsakh materially and by blood. It is claimed that 5 to 6% of the Republic of Armenia’s budget, that naturally comes from the taxes the citizens of Armenia pay, is devoted to Artsakh, which presents 1/30 of Armenia's population. We know the inordinate human cost the citizens of Armenia bear having a few thousand of their young sons martyred during the Artakh war/s. 

From Arayik to Samvel, for now, there does not appear to be a change in the fundamental policy of Artsakh which obviously is an existential matter. His inaugurals address focused on the fundamental that is a matter of “to be or not to be” for Artsakh. 

I quote president Samvel Shahramanyan:

“Dear Members of Parliament, the essence of the vision presented to you can be summed up in the following brief formulation. strengthening the state and maintaining internal stability, protecting Artsakh's right to self-determination, ensuring its free life and security, promoting the country's economic development, gradually improving the social condition of the people and strengthening law and order. “Հարգելի պատգամավորներ՝ Ձեզ արդեն իսկ ներկայացրած տեսլականի էությունը կարելի է ամփոփել հետևյալ սեղմ ձևակերպմամբ. պետության ամրապնդում և ներքին կայունության պահպանում, Արցախի ինքնորոշման իրավունքի պաշտպանում, նրա ազատ կենսագործունեության և անվտանգության ապահովում, երկրի տնտեսական զարգացման խթանում, ժողովրդի սոցիալական վիճակի աստիճանական բարելավում և օրինականության ու կարգուկանոնի ամրապնդում։”

It is imperative that we read the newly elected president’s inaugural address to formulate an informed opinion for a constructive dialogue in the Diaspora.

 


Wednesday, January 8, 2025

Քաղաքականացած, ծանծաղ բանավէճ մը

 Ընթերցանութեան ժամանակ 2 վարկեան

վահէ Յ Աբէլեան

“Հայաստանի Պատմութիւն» կամ «Հայոց Պատմութիւն» բանավէճը քաղաքականացած, ծանծաղ բանավէճ մըն է մանաւանդ սփիւքի մէջ ուր, մեծամասնութեամբ կ'ապրինք եւ հետեւաբար կը սորվինք մեզ հիւրընկալող երկրին պատմութիւնը։  իսկ մեր պատմութեան պրպտումները ընդհանրապէս կ՚ընենք մեզ հիւրընկալ երկրին լեզուով որուն լաւապէս տիրապետած ենք։

եթէ համացանցի որոնման համակարգ Google-ին դիմէք Անգլերէնով, պիտի հանդիպինք հետեւեալին՝ American history ձեր պրպտումը պիտի առաջնորդէ ձեզ «History of the United States-ին – Պատմութիւն Միացեալ Նահանգներու»։ Canadian history-ի պարագային, ձեր պրպտումը պիտի յանգի “History of Canada-ին – Գանատայի Պատմութիւն»։ Նոյնն է պարագան այլ ազգերու  պատմութեան որոնումները։ Բայց եթէ համացանցին վրայ փնտռէք Kurdish history-ին, պիտի հանդիպիք՝ “History of Kurds-ին – Քիւրտերու Պատմութիւն»։

Եթէ համացանցի վրայ ձեր պրպտումը ընէք Հայերէնով, Հայոց պատմութիւնը ձեզ պիտի առաջնորդէ Հայոց պատմութեան բայց եւ պիտի հանդիպիք այս ակնարկին՝ «Անվան այլ կիրառումների տես՝ Հայաստանի պատմություն - այլ կիրառումներ»։ Իսկ նոյն պրպտումը ձեզ պիտի տանի «History of Armenia-ին – Հայաստանի Պատմութիւն», որպէս Հայոց Պատմութիւն  (տես ներքեւը)։ 

Համացանցը ազգի մը պատմութեան որոնումը նոյնացուցած է երկրին հետ, աւելի ճիշդ՝ պետութեան հետ։ Այսինքն ազգին եւ իր պետութեան պատմութիւնը նոյնացած են՝ բացի այն պարագայէն, երբ ազգ մը պետականազուրկ է, ինչպէս է Քիւրտերու պարագային։

Հայաստանի մէջ՝ մինչեւ երկրորդական վարժարան՝ դաստիարակութիւնը տեղի կ'ունենայ պետական դպրոցներու մէջ, նման Ամերիկայի Միացեալ Նահանգներու։  Հետեւաբար անբնական չէ որ պետութիւնը միջամուխ ըլլայ կրթական ծրագրին, ինչպէս կը պատահի Ամերիկայի մէջ։ Օրինակի համար, Ամերիկեան պետութիւնը արգիլած է կրօնի դասաւանդութիւնը Ամերիկայի հանրային դպրոցներէն ներս։ կարգ մը գիրքեր արգիլած են ոչ միայն որպէս դասագիրք, այլ նոյնիսկ դպրոցի գրադարաններէն ներս։ Հետեւաբար անբնական չէ որ Հայաստանի կառավարութիւնը միջամուխ ըլլայ պետական դպրոցներու կրթական ծրագրին։ Հաւանաբար Հայաստանի մէջ կան ոչ պետական դպրոցներ որոնք պետութեան կրթական ծրագիրին կողքին կը գործադրեն նաեւ իրենց կրթական առաքելութիւնը՝ ինչպէս օրինակ՝ օտար լեզուի դասաւանդութիւնը։ Ամերիկայի մէջ, կաթողիկէ  ոչ պետական  դպրոցները կրօն կը դասաւանդեն, բան մը որ արտօնուած չէ պետական դպրոցներէն ներս։

Իմ սերնդակիցներս ոչ թէ հայոց պատմութիւն սորվեցան, այլ դաստիարակուեցան Հայոց Պատմութեամբ։ Իմ մտապատկերիս վրայ դրոշմուած են Սիմոն Սիմոնեանի Հայոց Պատմութեան դասագիրքերը, զորս կարդացեր եմ ոչ միայն պարզապէս իբր դասագիրք, այլ նաեւ մէկէ աւելի անգամ՝ իբր զիս շատ հետաքրքրող ընթերցանութեան գիրքեր, որոնց հերոսները բոցավառած են երեւակայութիւնս։ Ես եւ Իմ սերնդակիցներս ալ, երջանկայիշատակ Գարեգին Ա. Ամենայն Հայոց Կաթողիկոսի խօսքով՝ Հայաստան չծնանք, բայց Հայաստանը ծնաւ մեր մէջ շնորհիւ մանաւանդ Հայոց Պատմութեան։ Բայց անսպասելի չէ որ որ Հայաստանածիներուն համար հայոց պամութեան դասաւանդութեան ընկալումը տարբեր ըլլայ սփիւռքահայուն ընկալումէն։

Բնականաբար ես ալ գիտակից եմ կեանքի չոր իրողութիւններուն։ Հարց տամ ձեզի՝ Կը խորհի՞ք որ Ամերիկայի Միացեալ Նահանգներուն հարաւի սահմանակից երկիրը՝ Մեքսիքան, պատմական Մեքսիքան իր պատմութեան ծրագրին մաս ըրած է։ Կը կարծի՞ք որ Մեքսիքայի պատմութեան մէջ Ամերիկայի Միացեալ Նահանգներու հետ իրենց իրենց ունեցած պատմական հողային հարցերը մաս կը կազմեն իրենց պատմութեան։ Ես կը կասկածիմ։ Ես չեմ լսած Մեքսիքացի քաղաքացի մը որ իր նախագահին հարց տայ որ արդի՞ոք Ամերիկայի New Mexico նահանգը Մեքսիքական հող եղած է անցեալին։ Գէթ երբեմնի ծաւալապաշտ Ամերիկան պահած է անունը։ Ամէնայն հաւանութեամբ Մեքսիքան կը դասաւանդէ ներկայ Միքսիքայի Պատմութիւնը։ Հայաստանի պարագային վարչապետը այդ իրողութիւնը կը կոչէ իրական Հայաստան փոխանակ ներկայ Հայաստան։ 

Եթէ Հայաստանի պետական դպրոցները իրենց պատմութեան դասագիրքը պիտի կոչեն «Հայաստանի Պատմութիւն», ես առարկութիւն չունիմ եւ ոչ ալ տրամաբանօրէն կրնամ ունենալ։ Չմոռնանք որ ներկայ Հայաստանի պատմութեան մէջ Արեւմտեան Ազրպէյճան գոյութիւն չունի, հոն կայ Սունեաց աշխարհը։ Ինչպէս նաեւ ներկայ Մեքսիքայի պատմութեան մէջ չկայ Ամերիկայի Ծոց (Gulf of America), Ամերիկայի նորընտիր նախագահին ակնարկով, բայց կայ Մեքսիքայի Ծոց (Gulf of Mexico).

Չեմ համոզուած որ Հայաստանի մէջ Հայաստանի Պատմութիւն կամ Հայոց Պատմութեան բանավէճը պատմութեան դասաւանդութեան սիրոյն է, այլ ներքին քաղաքական ընդիմադրութեան լծակ մըն է, կամ պատրուակ մըն է։ Որպէս ակադեմական բանավէճ ծանծաղ բանավէճ մըն է։ Մեր պատմութեան ուսուցումը կոչել Հայաստանի Պատմութիւն կամ Հայոց Պատմութիւն ոչ մէկ բան կը նշանակէ։ Հարցը բնականաբար անցեալի իրադարձութիւններուն ուսումնասիրութիւնն է Հայաստանի աշակերտներուն պատմութեան դասագիրքերուն մէջ, ինչ որ ըլլայ պատմութեան դասագիրքին անուանակոչութիւնը։ Իրողութիւնը այն է որ սփիւռքը ըսելիք չունի Հայաստանի կրթական ծրագրին մշակման մէջ, եւ ոչ ալ մասնակից պէտք է որ ըլլայ անոր քաղաքականացած բանավէճին։

Սփիւռքը բնականաբար կրնայ շարունակել դասաւանդել մեր պատմութիւնը որպէս Հայոց Պատմութիւնը եւ կարիքը չունի Հայաստանի արդի հայերէն պատմութեան դասագիրքերուն մանաւանդ որ սփիւռքին մեծամանսութիւնը արդէն չի կրնար Հայերէն կարդալ։

 


Armenia Responds to Ilham Aliyev’s allegations -- 2 -

Բնագիրը կցուած է ներքեւը։ I attached my Google aided translation of the PM Nikol Pashinyan’s response to Ilham Aliyev’s allegation to ARMENPRESS.AM today, January 8, 2025. See the PM Nikol Pashinyan’s Facebook page for the orginial. Vahe H Apelian

 

Mr. Prime Minister, the President of Azerbaijan made aggressive statements in an interview with local TV channels regarding the Republic of Armenia. What is your assessment? – 

Perhaps Baku is trying to create “legitimacy” for escalation in the region. Aggressive statements are being made with the expectation that aggressive responses will be heard from Yerevan, which will give Baku the opportunity to make its own statements more aggressive, combining this with the dissemination of false information about the violation of the ceasefire regime by the Armenian army in order to create a “justification” for a new escalation in the region. We will not follow this path. We will remain committed to the peace strategy and will consistently continue the implementation of the peace agenda. This means that we will use the language of dialogue, not aggression. We will continue to focus on the issues of demarcation, agreement on the text of the peace treaty, the implementation of the “Crossroads of Peace” project, humanitarian issues, including the clarification of the fate of the missing.

The President of Azerbaijan accuses Armenia of being a fascist state. Does this also fit into the logic you mentioned? – 

Without a doubt, because the calculation is that the reaction will be: you are the fascist, and the spiral I described will begin to tighten. But there is another approach. Let's record that Azerbaijan has such a perception of Armenia and try to understand what the reason is. On the other hand, it is obvious that the Republic of Armenia also has such a perception of Azerbaijan. It is precisely these mutual perceptions that have led to the multi-year conflict. But the peace strategy is for us to record that Azerbaijan has such a perception of us, and for them to record that Armenia has such a perception of them. The peace agenda is about discussing and addressing these perceptions. Some of the agreed articles of the draft peace treaty close the page on some of these perceptions, while other parts provide an opportunity to make all mutual negative perceptions part of the bilateral agenda and address them. I would like to add that we have proposed solutions regarding the two articles of the peace treaty that were not agreed upon and, in case of a positive response from Azerbaijan, we are ready to sign the treaty.

The President of Azerbaijan has again spoken about the corridor, saying that it must be opened and will be opened. What does this mean?

 The Republic of Armenia has put the "Crossroads of Peace" project on the table and is preparing to implement it. There is no other project on our agenda. "Crossroads of Peace" implies the opening of all transport communications in the region, including Azerbaijan-Azerbaijan through the territory of Armenia and Armenia-Armenia through the territory of Azerbaijan. I have already had the opportunity to announce that we have made a very specific proposal to Azerbaijan to open the Yeraskh-Sadarak-Ordubad-Meghri-Zangelan railway. This is more than a proposal, it is a specific solution to specific issues, and we are waiting for a positive response from Azerbaijan, after which the agreement will be recorded on paper, and we will begin the construction of our sections of the railway.

And what do you say about Aliyev's statement yesterday about the so-called "Western Azerbaijan"?

 Nothing new has been said on this topic for me to have a new response. And I responded to what was said previously in a previous interview with "Armenpress". I reaffirm my answer.

The President of Azerbaijan has again spoken about the armament of the Republic of Armenia, saying that it will only bring new tension to the region.

I have repeatedly touched on this topic. There is no element of illegitimacy in the agenda of the reforms of the army of the Republic of Armenia. I must repeat that the Republic of Armenia recognizes the territorial integrity of all its neighbors, including Azerbaijan, and expects the same, that is, clear and unconditional recognition of the territorial integrity of Armenia from Azerbaijan. I have also stated that we do not set a goal of returning more than 200 square kilometers of occupied territories of the Republic of Armenia by military means, because the demarcation process provides an opportunity to address this issue peacefully, through negotiations. Having stated all this, no one can dispute the right of the Republic of Armenia to have a capable army. As for the concerns related to armament, we also have concerns about the armament by Azerbaijan, and we have also heard their concerns. This is the reason why we have proposed to Azerbaijan to form a mechanism for mutual control of armaments and are waiting for their response.

In recent days, Azerbaijan has repeatedly spread information that the Armenian army has allegedly violated the ceasefire regime on the Armenia-Azerbaijan border.

The Armenian Ministry of Defense denied this information, recalling the proposal to create a joint mechanism for investigating cases of ceasefire violations. - Of course, the information about the violation of the ceasefire regime by our army does not correspond to reality. But in order not to make such situations a reason for periodic debates, we have proposed creating a joint mechanism to jointly check every alarm about the violation of the ceasefire regime and come to joint conclusions. We are waiting for Azerbaijan's response. 

 Ilham Aliyev also said that the next meeting of the demarcation commissions will take place in January.

Yes, a meeting is planned in January. I am convinced that the positive experience of the demarcation that took place in 2024 should be developed calmly, in working conditions. We are disposed to such work. Subscribe to our channel on Telegram

Բնագիրը՝ https://armenpress.am/hy/article/1208938?fbclid=IwY2xjawHwF8ZleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHeVBKiyrDn4-iNAJb36izWaFL-DyvbtXJnMDUuAGXPZCOmIEkT0PSWgkBQ_aem_BYbev3gTrpN7483frvyfxw

 

 

  

 

 

Friday, January 3, 2025

In memory of Annais Apelian Toutikian

 Vahe H. Apelian

Anna-the-bride (Anna Titizian Apelian), Anna Khatcher Chelebian, 
Annais Apelian Toutikian, Annie Chelebian Hoglind

Yesterday I read that Annais (Apelian) Toutikiian succumbed to her illness and passed away on Thursday January 2, 2025, in Canada. She was a family relation. My late mother took special pride noting that Annais was dressed up for her wedding to Joseph Toutikiian in her house in Antelias, Lebanon and that she escorted her out for her wedding.  She took immense pride in seeing the family Annais and Joseph had formed and wrote about her sentiments in that regard in a Kessab yearbook of years past.

The family relations were deep. Annais paternal grandfather Kerop Apelian was my mother’s maternal uncle, that is to say Kerop was the brother of mother’s mother, my maternal grandmother Karoun (Apelian) Chelebian. Annais’ mother Sirvart Chelebian, was my mother's paternal aunt, that is to say Sirvart was the daughter of my mother’s  paternal uncle.  My maternal grandparents Khacher Chelebian and Karoun Apelian were married in their makeshift camp in Attiyeh Syria, where they were driven in 1915 along many Kessabtsis, instead of to Deir ez Zor.

Annais’ obituary noted that she was born in 1950 in Keurkune, Kessab, Apelian family’s ancestral village. That makes her four years my junior. There is also much history associated with Annais’ name as well, that goes way back to her paternal grandmother Anna (Titilzian) Apelian. Annais’ brother, the late Kevork George Apelian immortalized their paternal grandmother Anna in his book, “Anna the bride”. 

Annais’ grandmother Anna’s marriage to Kerop had been the sensational event in Kessab of their days. It had come about by elopement. Anna had done the unthinkable. She had crossed all by herself in the darkness of the night and through the eerie silence of the  gorge and walked all alone all the way from the coastal village Kaladouran to Keurkune to her lover's parent's house, to the utter astonishment of his parents and only sister, my grandmother Karoun. Something had gone terribly wrong. Trusted intermediaries had worked out a plan. Kerop and his friends were to meet Anna in the cover of the night and escort her to his house. But the lovers missed either the rendezvous point or the timing, so Anna took upon herself to finish the task and walked to  Kerop’s parent's house and waited for her lover’s return. Never in greater Kessab had a girl walked all by herself to her lover’s house before. She had always been free spirited with a mind of her own and was also known for her beauty. 

Anna, however, was not to experience the tranquility of a family life with the man she chose to love. In time Kerop Apelian left his pregnant wife Anna and their firstborn child Kevork behind in Keurkune, under the care of his parents and sister, my grandmother Karoun,  and joined his two brothers in New York to have his family join him after settling in the New World. When his pregnant wife gave birth to their second son, Kerop sent word from America to name him James for the family was to join him in America. But that was not to be. 

In June 1915, Anna and her two young sons; her in laws, Kerop’s father Hanno, and Kerop’s mother, also Anna; and her sister-in-law, my maternal grandmother Karoun, were forcefully driven into the interior of Syria. Only my grandmother Karoun and Anna’s young son James survived the ordeal. The rest fell victims to the first genocide of the 20th century.   

"Anna the Bride" by Kevork George Apelian.
The book has been translated to Arabic,
 English by Annie Hoglind
and to Italian

In time James Apelian joined his father in America but did not want to live there, and returned to keurkune where he married Sirvart Chelebian, my maternal grandmother Karoun (Apelian) Chelebian’s sister-in-law.  Three children survived to adulthood from that marriage, Kevork George, Annais, and Kerop.

James and Sirvart (Chelebian) Apelian had named their first-born daughter Anna, in memory of child’s paternal grandmother Anna. But the child died in her infancy. My widowed grandmother’s youngest child also named Anna,  died of pneumonia when she was vivacious sixteen years old beautiful girl and was also buried in the Keurkune’s ancient cemetery next to her father Khatcher who also had died due to pneumonia at the age of 38. Anna’s tombstone reads in Armenian: “Here rests Anna K. Chelebian (1928-1945), “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God” (Mathew 5:8). 

My grandmother Karoun ruled out naming any daughter Anna, henceforth. But the memories of the Annas lingered. Thus, a variation of the name Anna evolved in the persons of my maternal cousin Annie (Chelebian) Hoglind, and in the person of Annais (Apelian) Toutikian. Both of whom became proud grandmothers.

I convey my deepest condolences to Annais’ husband Joseph and their two sons Haig James, Troy Aram and daughter Maria Sira and their children.

 

He Was Different - Ան Ուրիշ էր

Բնագիրը կցուաց է Attached is my translation of Simon Simonian’s poignant story about his mother. The story is titled "He Was Different" - "An Ourish Er - Ան Ուրիշ Էր. It was the first story in Simon Simonian's book titled "The Mountaineers' Twilight” - “Լեռնականներու Վերջալոյսը”, published in Beirut in 1968. Vahe H. Apelian

Bédo was my mother’s first husband and my father’s bosom friend. My father and Bédo had worked together in the same mill. After Bedo’s death my father married his wife, my mother.

After his death, Bédo has continued living in our house and continues to live as a husband, as a father and as a friend, but as a foe of a friend. My father, who had loved him as a brother, is the only one who is discontented with Bédo coming back to life. His animosity started after Bédo’s interment. I remember well, during my childhood, every time there was bad feeling between my mother and my father, the person responsible for the trouble was Bédo who worked in mysterious ways after his death much like all the great souls, saints and heroes do after their deaths.

Bédo was not a saint or a hero. He was a mere Sassountsi from the Dalvorig village. He was the son of an ironsmith. His father had worked in the Dalvorig mines extracting iron from the rock veins and melting it to make plows, hatchets, shovels, pickaxes, and rifles. The guns were muzzle type with which he, his brothers and the villagers had defended themselves against attacks by Kurds and Turks. The leaders of the Armenians were Mourad (Hampartsoum Boyandjian), Mihran Damadian, “Baron” Vahan, Kevork Chavoush and other luminaries of the time. It is in honor of Bédo’s father and his comrades that the once popular patriotic song, “I am a Brave Son of Dalvorig”, was sung.

At twenty Bédo had left Sassoun and after working in mills, had settled in Aintab much like many Sassountsis. At twenty-five, he had married my mother Ménnoush who was barely eighteen then. Bédo, a handsome, brave young man, had captivated my mother’s heart.

“Mother, was Bédo handsome?” I used to ask my mother in my childhood as she recounted stories about him.

“There was no other like him,” my mother would say and continue: “He had dark eyebrows and moustache; a handsome posture, a proportioned face. He dressed like a bég. All the girls in our town noted his manly handsomeness. Lucky you, the women would tell me…..”

To validate her description, she would open her old chest, the dowry chest, which along with her and much like her, was becoming a worn down witness of old and happy days. From underneath the moth laden, malodorous, dark blue, apricot and pearl-colored worn out clothes, she would pull out her photo bundle, unwrap its silky shroud and hand to me her wedding picture so that I would look at Bédo, her Bédo.

My mother’s recollection would fill my soul with fascination towards the man who had once been my mother’s husband. To further stress so that I would not waver from the impression I harbored of the dead man, my mother would add: “In this picture he does not look as handsome as he was. Hey, bygone days. We took this picture in haste. He had just returned from the mill and was covered with flour all over. The neighbors were having their pictures taken. In our days, women did not go to the photographer’s shop. We had this picture taken on the spur of that very moment because he refused to change his clothes”

At times, during these mysterious viewing sessions, my father would happen to suddenly step in the house. My mother, with tears still in her eyes, would wrap the picture and place it back. My father, silent and sad, would sit at a corner and inhale the smoke from his cigarette more deeply than usual. My father’s sad silence would last for days, sometimes for even weeks during which time he would not speak with my mother. That absent person beyond the grave thus caused a lot of heartache between my father and my mother. My father’s sadness, my mother’s tears and the omnipresence of the departed would fill my childhood soul with an unexplainable mystery.

During winter, whenever my father would be absent for months on end working in the mills, my mother would sit around the oven area during the evenings and tell us about Bédo who had told her father “let your ‘yes’ not be a ‘no’”. After long deliberation, her father had consented to give his daughter away in marriage to Bédo. After their engagement, during which they had seen each other only once, seven years of blissful marriage followed.

“He was an out of the ordinary man”, my mother would tell us;  “whenever he missed home, whether there was snow or blizzard, he would walk for four hours in the cold of the night just to come home.”

Of course my mother was the repository of his joy. They thus lived happily but without a child. My mother had believed that on the seventh year of their marriage, she would conceive and carry his child. The seventh year brought with it the unexpected, Bédo’s sudden death in the mill during work. There is no need to visualize my mother’s torment and agony. My mother would recount his elaborate funeral procession and the overwhelming sadness among the Sassountsis and would particularly emphasize my father’s inconsolable lament over the loss of his bosom friend. Time did not heal my mother’s wounds. There had remained only one thing for my mother, visiting her husband’s gravesite even in the dead of the winter.

“I remember well,” my mother would say. “It was Vartanants Day and I needed to visit his grave at any cost. Our cemetery did not have walls or guards. There was the fear of wolves. My mother was with me. As I was walking among the graves, suddenly Bédo appeared in front of me in the same dress we had him dressed for his interment. I froze. He looked at me and said, ‘return home and do not come here anymore’. My mother arrived and saw me standing still. I told her nothing about the occurrence. I grabbed her arm and we returned home. We had not reached Bédo’s grave yet. My mother remained perplexed.”.

That day became a turning point for my mother. From there on she found refuge in her needlework. From a whole year’s labor she raised enough funds to place a tombstone on Bedo’s grave, on which she had inscribed:

However, the thick tombstone with all its weight has not been able to contain Bédo’s heart that continues to live on this earth, that is to say, in my mother’s bosom.

A year passed. My father proposed to marry her. They got married. They started having children. My mother devoted herself to raising her children. But she never forgot her Bédo. The passing years and responsibilities crystallized Bédo’s love like a diamond that my mother keeps in her heart. In fact, it’s the only crystal she carries in her heart. She raised her children in memory of Bédo. My mother is convinced that we are Bedo’s children for, as a matter of fact, Bédo had appeared to her the day before her conception. Without the apparition of Bédo, she claimed, she had never conceived. Bédo had become our Holy Ghost

My mother had willed that when she died, she should be buried next to Bédo. However, her exile put an end to that vow. But my mother had taken another solemn vow that neither exile nor war or anything earthly would deter her from that solemn vow. In her after life she would be with her Bédo. My father knew about my mother’s alarming preference. That is why he remained melancholic the rest of his life. He knew that there was a fateful separation in store for him in afterlife.

My mother’s preference had me ponder. I have thought that her first love, Bédo’s handsomeness and bravery, the loss of her youthful happiness influenced her decision to make her preference known to us. But there was something different with my mother. Whenever I quizzed her, she would only say: "He was different.”

My mother admits that my father, her second husband, has been virtuous, God-fearing, good natured, just and has always treated her kindly. But all my father’s virtues have given way to the appeal of the deceased. My mother, in her essence, remains the spouse of the deceased. My father carries a wound that never healed because of my mother’s total devotion to Bédo. That is why his once bosom friend Bédo, has become his foe after his death for whom he can do no harm with his living self. The other, on the other hand, from the beyond, continues to aggravate my father on Earth.

We, the children, presented alternating stands towards our two fathers. In our childhood, through my mother’s tales, we deeply loved Bédo. When we grew older and realized our father’s pain, we sided with him and pounded Bédo, who through his interference from the world beyond, caused so much grief to our father. Our assault for a while bore fruits. Bédo’s downfall started. But we could never dethrone him for my mother continued to open her wooden chest, unwrap the bundle and with her fingers caress the pictures while murmuring softly “He was different.”

We ended our teens, rounded our twenties and became more mature. We ceased to side with either of my parents. It was the period of our neutrality. We let our mother receive her extraterrestrial visitor in our home and continue her affair with him. But we did not let her verbalize her preference to us.

There remains the last chapter for us that will start in the afterlife. We are sure that a separation will take place, our mother will re-join with her Bédo who is surely waiting impatiently for her. We will remain with our father. Separated from us, our mother will miss us. She will vacillate between her Bédo and us. She will want to join us with Bédo in a threesome arrangement of sorts. My father who despised the francophone triangle and the ghostly presence of Bédo will not want to have his erstwhile friend turn his foe in our midst. We, who were not accustomed to such things on Earth, will reject our mother’s proposition. With each passing day, our mother will miss us more and more. She will eventually concede, leave her Bédo behind and join us, and we will have our family anew.                                                      

 

                                                             ***

I wrote this piece after a long delay and reader be mindful that my mother is an old woman as I write about her Bédo. She has heard from my brothers that I write about Sassountsis. She confronted me once and said: “Son, let it not be that you write about Bédo. He was not like Mano or Magar. He was different…..”

Forgive me mother, for I wrote about your Bédo.”

    Բնագիրը՝