Levon Sharoyan: Haleb must be preserved - 1 -

Having read Dr. Tchilingirian’s disturbing article in the Weekly, I thought its fair that I present  to readers of this blog, my AI aided translation of a recent interview with Levon Sharoyan posted in Aleppo’s official online journal Kantsasar.

“Levon Sharoyan has been a lecturer at the Hamazkayin Armenian Studies Institute in Aleppo since 2000, where he teaches Armenian language, Diaspora Armenian literature, and the history of the Armenian Church. He is also a teacher of Armenian literature at the AGBU Lazar Najarian-Caloust Gulbenkian Secondary School in Aleppo (since 2014) and a visiting lecturer at the “Armenology Courses” of the Catholicosate of Cilicia (since 2018). He has given numerous lectures in Syria and elsewhere, has published dozens of books and numerous articles scattered in the press, mostly literary analysis and criticism. Many of his diverse studies remain unpublished. He has also edited and prepared for reprinting the 15-volume series of Teodik’s famous yearbook (1907-1925), which have been published in Aleppo as Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation’s official book series since 2006.” Vaհe H Apelian

Levon Sharoyan
"Syrian Arab Republic, Aleppo Arises, Free,Secure in God" 

"Horizon".- Mr. Sharoyan, you remained and worked in Aleppo throughout the Syrian crisis. After the exhausting years of war, what is the situation of our Armenian community in Aleppo today?

L.Sh.- Yes, the Syrian war that began in 2011 both severely hit the prosperous national life of my community and, on an individual level, displaced hundreds of Armenian families, driving or throwing them to near and far foreign shores...

65-70 percent of the Armenians of Aleppo fled. Some took their last breath in neighboring Lebanon, some officially emigrated to Canada and Australia, the more resourceful ones managed to secure a place for their families in this or that European country. Now they all say that they are happy, they are already working, they have learned the local language, they are accustomed to the new environment, etc. The West attracts young people in particular. However, there is a “worm” that continues to gnaw at them. That is the longing for Aleppo. The warm social atmosphere of our city, the quality of human relations, but especially the irreplaceable warmth of the Armenian family circle remains a lost and irreplaceable value for the migrants. For this very reason, all the migrants follow the Armenian news from Aleppo or Syria very closely, because they have left half of their hearts there….

Of course, there was also a large segment of the migrant population that preferred to settle in Armenia. This step was welcome, because it was both a natural desire and preference to live under the roof of the homeland, and it was a security from the point of view of preserving the national identity of the children of that family or school-age youth. Today, you see a significant presence of Syrian Armenians in Yerevan, and everyone is generally satisfied, the elderly also enjoy the financial care of the state. An advantage that they were deprived of in Syria. The number of our mother community has certainly dwindled. There has been no census, and I am not able to provide accurate numbers or data. However, we have 3 cases before our eyes, which speak for themselves. One is the exodus of Armenians from the Armenian-populated district of Nor Gyugh. Hundreds of Armenian families left there without returning, and the local Armenian craftsmanship also disappeared. The national Zavarian and Sahakian schools there were forcibly closed.

The second factor is the number of students in the schools. Our schools, which had about 1200 students before the war, currently have barely 250-300 students... These numbers are a true reflection of the community's poverty.

The third factor is the marriage rate, which has decreased significantly over the past ten years, both for economic reasons and as a result of the emigration of the young. The decrease in marriage rates has certainly created a social crisis, characterized by the proliferation of mixed marriages, as a result of the inequality in the number of Armenian boys and girls. Boys are emigrating, and many young girls... remain at home. And therefore, the natural course of the establishment and flourishing of the Armenian Family is being hampered. The phenomenon of mixed marriages, which is alien to Aleppo, is beginning to emerge, and I assume that it may become more and more acute in the coming years if the national bodies do not take tangible steps to assist Armenian young men and women who are candidates for marriage.

There are constructions here and there, a church on the outskirts of the city is being renovated, etc. I think that people should be valued before stones. Let the order of others come later….

The community, national, and union life of Aleppo certainly continues with the same momentum as before, but with a lower quality, since a large exodus of people took place to Armenia and the West.

Church life is very lively. Our Primate, having two priests from the Antelias Congregation at his side, together with local priests, deacons, and scribes, keeps the churches well-maintained and vibrant, and does not fail to make frequent pastoral visits to distant Qamishli, Kessab, Latakia, Yaqubiye, and elsewhere, comforting and strengthening his wounded flock.

Schools are operating with the same intensity as before, but they have new kinds of anxieties, which are not only material. The most serious issue is the large number of non-Armenian students in many schools. I understand that this phenomenon is sometimes inevitable (how can a school survive with 60-70 students? It is forced to open its doors to non-Armenian applicants in order to balance its meager budget...), but this has a negative impact on the internal Armenian face of the Armenian school, on the Armenian language, and on the efficiency of the Armenian language teachers. As for the union front, it must be said that the country's crisis has greatly weakened or frozen some associtions and clubs. The large associations (like Hamazkayin, Syrian Armenian Relief, or AGBU) continue almost all of their former activities. It is the small associations that have experienced a decline and are still suffering from a lack of personnel. There are clubs that have become nominal. They are either closed or have a formal and marginal presence. This is the case with many of the former compatriot associations.

The only newspaper in my city, the weekly “Kantsasar”, continues to operate admirably, retaining a not inconsiderable number of supportive columnists.

Aleppo is now a diminished, somewhat depressed community reminding us of similar situations in the past of the Armenian communities in Egypt or Iraq. But it is not exhausted. Its former vitality can be renewed if it is governed wisely and prudently, if it frees itself from the shackles of despair and acts, if it works with collective efforts. From this perspective, the change of power in Syria should be perceived POSITIVELY.

But at the same time, I think that all our communities also have questions, are experiencing setbacks. Is Lebanon better, where there is no intellectualism left, schools have dwindling numbers, newspapers and pubs are collapsing…? France, where there is no Armenian-speaking population, Argentina, where our newspapers are published in Spanish, Constantinople, which has already buried all the greats of its glorious Armenian literature (the last being R. Haddejian), without having prepared or trained any replacements….

Returning to your question, as for my family and I staying in Aleppo, that too must probably be explained by the strong and inexplicable spiritual bond that had bound me to this “dream” city of Tsarukyan with an iron chain. Yes, we stayed here, enduring numerous difficulties, sometimes grumbling, sometimes adapting to the created situations, sometimes depriving ourselves of basic household necessities, thinking that “tomorrow will be better”.

Aleppo is the flower of the Diaspora, which must be nurtured, watered, and grown continuously, in order to enjoy the blessings, it will offer tomorrow or the day after.

An Armenian Library is closed: Personal libraries – 2/2 –

The attached is my continued translation of an article Dr. Armenag Yeghiayan penned a few years ago regarding the closure of Armenian libraries (see the link below). The first segment dealt with the closure of the New York Armenian Community Center’s library and is linked below. This segment pertains to personal libraries. Vaհe H Apelian

First row: Ardashes Der-Khachadourian personal library, Ardashes Der-Khachadourian.
Second Row: Hagop Iskenderian, Vahe-Vahian

Ardashes Der-Khachadourian’s library

The library of Ardashes Der-Khachadourian, most likely was the most magnificent personal Armenian library in the entire Diaspora rivaling the Matenadaran in Armenia, the library of the Cilician See and the library of Haigazian University in Beirut. It too suffered a fate similar to the library of the New York Armenian Community Center.

In the last years of his life, Ardashes Der-Khachadourian tried to sell it, but was unsuccessful. After his death, which came as a complete surprise, his heirs tried to sell it within Lebanon, but were also unsuccessful. In the end, the representative of the Armenian Department of the British Library in London bought the entire collection and took it to England. What fate awaits those books, which were the result of a teacher’s entire life’s work, struggle, and hardships, is difficult to guess. But it is also difficult to expect that there would be people waiting in line to read them. 

Hakob Iskenderian’s library

A slightly different fate befell on the library of Hakob Iskenderian, which, although did not have the numerical wealth of its predecessor Ardasher Der-Khachadourian’s library, was probably not less to it or any other library in terms of the quality of its books. Those books covered almost all the walls of their apartment. After his untimely death, the books began to oppress and haunt his widow as everyday reminders, to the point that she finally decided to get rid of them. Help came from Zaven Yegavian, the current director of the Armenian Department of the Gulbenkian Institute, who bought them all and gathered them in his apartment in Jal El Dib, which remains closed for almost twelve months of the year, and no one opens the pages of those books.

Vahe-Vahian’s Lbrary

More fortunate than the previous two was the Vahe-Vahian’s library, which also was a gem in its own right, assembled with the greatest taste, thanks to the long-term sacrifices of the teacher and poet Vahian. He was already 82 years old, and had very difficult vision problems. “My eyes are so weak that I have great difficulty reading, even with the help of a strong magnifying glass”, he had confided in a letter. And when at the suggestion of the buyer, a lecturer of Armenian language and literature in Michigan, Vahe-Vahian described the assembly of his library, he wrote: “my eyes began to water in a state of mind for writing an obituary”. In this case, an opposite movement took place. That magnificent and exquisite library went from Middle East to the United States to establish a site under the auspices of the American Armenology Department.  What exactly is its fate there, how much Armenians and Armenology benefit from it, we do not know ( see note 1). We only know that Vahe-Vahian replaced the light he lost in his eyes with something else. By bringing together all the money he had, he established a foundation that still operates to this day, 20 years after his death, by allocating annually funds towards the publication of a worthy work on Armenology.

It is in such variegated ways that Diaspora Armenian libraries are fading away or disappearing before our helpless, sometimes indifferent eyes.

And now, here was the news of the closing of the doors of the New York Armenian Community Center's library, a century old public library.

How can we not recall the poet’s well-known lament: "The language in which I wrote, a few on the face of the earth read, they too are dwindling”.

Vahan Tekeyan had spent many difficult days. He had even had experienced the bitter taste of hunger. Contemporaries told the writer sometimes would come to the editorial office of "Zartonk", hungry relying on Parounak Tovmasian, from whom he would borrow a meager sum, as a monthly stipend, for sustenance with a daily plate of ful (see note 2). But we find no hint of personal bitterness in his prose or verse. 

There are two things, however, towards which he could not remain indifferent. Tekeyan lamented the loss of one of his eyes (see note 3), and the loss of Armenian readership.

***

Note: 1      According to a reliable source, Vahe-Vahian’s personal library is at Harvard University.

Note 2:          Ful (Foul) Medames—a Middle Eastern/North African dish of stewed fava beans—is an exceptionally cheap, healthy, and filling diet component. It is widely considered one of the most budget-friendly, nutrient-dense meals available.

Note 3:         “He (Vahan Tekeyan) closed his one and only eye to the world, his other eye having fallen victim to his political adversaries. He was an early casualty for the cause of freedom of speech as thugs beat him to death in 1916 for an editorial he had written. But he survived with one eye blinded. Later on, he composed one of the most disturbing and movingly tragic poems about his eye titled, “My Only One”. (Edmond Y. Azadian, 2010). 

Link 1:  An Armenian Library is Closed: New York Community Center: https://vhapelian.blogspot.com/2024/01/an-armenian-library-is-closed.html

Link 2:       ԳՐԱԴԱՐԱՆ ՄԸՆ ԱԼ ԿԸ ՓԱԿՈՒԻ:                                                      http://vhapelian.blogspot.com/2018/03/blog-post.html

 

For a diverse National Assembly

Vaհe H Apelian

 

National Assembly of Armenia make-up

The present National Assembly of Armenia consists of 107 seats. 69 seats, of the National Assembly seats make the government, and 38 seats of the National Assembly constitutes the opposition. Could the National Assembly have a a broader representation by lowering the required threshold to have seats in the National Assembly?

During the June 20, 2021 snap parliamentary election, the criteria for having seats in the National Assembly was 5% of the votes cast for a single political party, and 7% of the votes cast for a coalition. Furthermore, the National Assembly is set to have at least 3 political entities as parties or coalitions, and the opposition should constitute at least 1/3 of the National Assembly. These requirements appear not to have changed for the June 2026 election.

But, during the June 20, 2021 snap general election, Serzh Sargsyan’s I Have Honor coalition amassed only 5.22% of the votes, which would not have qualified the coalition for any seat. However, it was the highest percentage among the rest of the competing political entities that did not qualify. Since the regulation called for at least 3 political entities in the National Assembly, I Have Honor party qualified for 7 candidates. 

We should bear in mind that the number of the deputies in the National Assembly of Armenia varies. That is why the December 2018 snap parliamentary election, resulted in a 132 seats National Assembly, while the June 12, 2021 snap parliamentary resulted in 107 seats National Assembly.

It should be noted that National Assembly of Armenia includes the base 101 members plus up to four minority representatives.  The two extra seats were added to ensure opposition representation occupies 1/3 of the seats of the National Assembly, as stipulated by law. But that number varies, depending on the election results. (see the note)

Let us also bear in mind that during the June 20, 2021 parliamentary election, Nikol Pashinyan led Civil Contract party had 53.95% of the votes. Robert Kocharyan led Armenia Alliance had 21.11% of the votes.  Serzh Sargsyan led I Have Honor coalition had 5.22%. Summing up these figures comes to 80.28%. What happened to the remaining 19.72% of the votes.? These votes were not cast in favor of Civil Contract, or I Have Honor, nor in favor of Armenia Alliance. They were cast to other political entities, and there were many of them, but none of them met the threshold requirement. But these votes were not lost but were absorbed by the three parties in the National Assembly, disfranchising these voters who did not vote for them.

The votes cast for the parties that did not qualify for a seat in National Assembly were absorbed by  Civil Cotract that had 54% of the votes, it ended up with 67% - 2/3 - of the National Assembly seats; the opposition that had 25% of the votes at the election, ended up with 33% or  - 1/3 - of the National Assembly seats.

Lowering the threshold for a political entity, say  to 1%, will give opportunity for more parties to be in the National Assembly, but it will greatly complicate the formation of a coalition government and  form a coherent opposition. 

Wikipedia notes that to qualify for seats in Israel's Knesset, a political entity must receive at least 3.25% of the total national vote. It is a threshold that has been raised in 2014 from the previous 2%, to encourage greater political stability by reducing small parties, though it has faced criticism for potentially marginalizing minority groups. Parties that cross this threshold – 3.25% - earn seats in proportion to their vote share.

Now let us assume that Armenia adopted a law that permits a party or a coalition have a lower threshold, at least 3.0 % of the votes, to qualify for seats in the National Assembly. How many parties would have been in the National Assembly?

During the June 20, 2021 snap general election 1,281,375 votes were cast. 3.00 %, or 38, 441 votes would have qualified the competing party/coalition for seats in the National Assembly. Consequently, in the addition to the three, the following would have seats in the National Assembly.

Prosperous Armenia, which had 50,444 votes, having recieved 3.95% of the votes.

And

Hanrapetutyun Party, which had 38,768 votes, having received 3.02% of the votes.

What would have changed in the National Assembly?

Instead of the current opposition, consisting of I Have Honor and Armenia Alliance, there would have been two more opposition parties, Gagik Tsarukyan led Prosperous Armenia, and Aram Sargsyan led Hanrapetutyun Party. The Civil Contract would have continued to lead the legislative National Assembly, much like it does at the present.

Consequently, lowering the threshold for assuring seats in the National Assembly is not the answer, as long as one political entity carries 50 plus of the votes.   

The answer for diversifying the National Assembly of Armenia may come about by diversifying the votes cast be to a reduced number of political entities vying for power, instead of over the 20 that took part in the June 20, 2021 election. And also, increasing the pre-election threshold for a political entity to qualify for candidacy in the national election. 

Note: Why the Armenian National Assembly Number Varies? -                                  https://vhapelian.blogspot.com/2018/12/why-armenian-national-assembly-numbers.html

  

 

Proverbs 3:4-5: In God We Trust

Rev. Avedis Boynerian graciously forwards me his Sunday sermon ahead of time. This Sunday January 18, 2026, Rev. Avedis Boynerian’s sermon was the Proverbs 3: 4-5. "In God We Trust" is also the official motto of the United States, mandated on all U.S. currency since 1956, appearing first on coins in 1864 during the Civil War for morale, and then on paper money in 1957, driven by Cold War anti-atheism efforts to distinguish the U.S. from the Soviet Union, though it remains a subject of debate. Use of credit card has given a mortal blow to the use of actual paper currency, and hence maybe reflecting on its motto. Attached is Rev. Avedis Boynerian’s reflection on “In God We Trust.”  Vaհe H Apelian

" The book of Proverbs is part of God’s people’s wisdom literature. 

King Solomon wrote the book primarily to teach God’s people how to live wisely and godly in everyday life. Proverbs chapter 3 is a father’s instruction to a child—a loving, pastoral appeal to walk in the fear of God. 

The chapter begins with a call to remember God’s teachings and to live with steadfast love and faithfulness. 

In the first 3 verses the writer says, “My son, do not forget my teaching, but keep my commands in your heart, for they will prolong your life many years and bring you peace and prosperity. Let love and faithfulness never leave you; bind them around your neck, write them on the tablet of your heart” (1-3).

Before Solomon speaks about trusting God, he speaks about character.

Verse 3 urges God’s people to bind love and faithfulness around their hearts.

Verse 4 shows the result: a life marked by favor and respect  in the sight of God and others.

Verse 5 reveals the foundation: wholehearted trust in God rather than self-reliance.

In other words, (trusting God is not an abstract idea—it is the root of a faithful life.

Solomon contrasts two ways of living: trusting God with the whole heart or leaning on our own limited understanding.

This teaching was important for God’s people, who are constantly tempted to rely on human wisdom rather than rely on God. These verses remind us that true wisdom begins with dependence on God. A life that trusts God leads to integrity and blessing because it is anchored in God’s faithfulness.

Let us bring this a bit closer:

Every day we make decisions—some small, some life-changing.  We rely on experience, advice, and even our emotions to guide us.  God’s Word speaks directly into this tension in our text (Proverbs 3:5–6) in which God invites us to a different way of living—not self-reliance, but God-reliance.

Our text shows us two ways to live and one powerful promise.

The Bible does not say we have no understanding—it says do not lean on it.

A person who leans on their own understanding, they trust their experience. They say, “I know what’s best for me” and they pray after decisions instead of before. 

Let us think about someone choosing a job. The salary and benefits are great and they make sense on paper. But there is no time for family, church or spiritual growth. Instead of asking God first, the decision is made—and later we ask God to bless it. Now, that’s leaning on our own understanding.

God does not ask for partial trust—He asks for all our heart. Trusting God means, 

— Submitting decisions to Him before acting

— Saying, “Lord, you know better than I do.”

— Obeying even when the outcome is unclear

— Walking by faith, not by sight

Abraham, who did not know where God was taking him—but he put his trust in God and obeyed Him. Peter, the disciple, stepped out of the boat without understanding how water would hold him—but he trusted Jesus and walked on sea. Trust does not mean we understand everything. Trust means we believe God understands everything.

Solomon commands his son to acknowledge Him. To “acknowledge God” means we invite Him into every area of our lives. Before responding to a difficult person, you pause and pray.

. Before making a financial decision, you ask, “Lord, is this honoring You?”

Before reacting emotionally, you seek God’s wisdom.

We do not acknowledge God only in church—we acknowledge Him in real life.

God does not promise:

An easy path

A fast path

A problem-free path.

But He does promise, to direct our path and take us under His care.

You may have heard this quote, “Sometimes God closes a door and opens another.” The question is not, “Do I believe in God?” The real question is, “Who am I trusting?”

Many people today would say, “Yes, I believe in God.”

They believe in other gods and/religions. 

         They believe in love — they say, “Love is all we need.”

         They believe in peace.

         They believe doing good is enough.

It is possible to mix faith—taking 

a little from Jesus, 

a little from the world, and 

a little from other religions—hoping it will bring peace. But Proverbs does not say, 

“Trust in wisdom,” or 

“Trust in peace,” or 

“Trust in love.”

Our text says, “Trust in the LORD with all your heart.” Trust is wholehearted surrender and not convenient trust, but dependence on God. Trust is choosing God’s faithfulness over our experience and on our feelings. This Lord is none other than Jesus, who said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”

When we lean on Jesus, we are leaning on Him, who, 

Loved us enough to go to the cross

Conquered sin and death through His resurrection

He lives today and leads us in the right path. So today, God invites us to lay down our,

.  self-reliance

. mixed trust and

. divided hearts and 

choose wholehearted trust in Jesus alone, Who directs our paths. Let’s: 

. Instead of forcing our plan, because it “makes sense,” we need to pray and take steps God guides us to take.

. Instead of panicking over what we cannot control, we need to trust God to carry us through.

. Instead of complaining, we need to trust God and His wisdom for our everyday life.

Leaning on God is not about seeing the whole picture—it’s about taking one step at a time. As we near to close, I want to speak to two hearts.

Some of you may believe in God—but today you sense Jesus inviting you to trust Him personally. 

Others of you already follow Jesus, yet you know you have been leaning on yourself. 

And today, God is lovingly calling you to renew your trust and return to wholehearted faith.

If today you are ready—whether for the first time or for a renewal—to say, “Jesus, I trust You, I invite you to respond by simply opening your heart to God.

Personal story: “There was a season in my life when I thought I had everything planned. I prayed, but honestly, I had already decided what the outcome should be. In my mind, I had the timing, the solution, and the direction all figured out. Things did not go as I expected. A door I was sure God would open stayed closed. Plans I felt confident about quietly fell apart. And I remember feeling frustrated —confused—asking God, “God, I am trusting You. So why isn’t this working?”

It was only later that I realized something: I was trusting God with my words, but leaning heavily on my own understanding. I wanted God to bless my plan, instead of surrendering myself to His plan.

Over time, God redirected my path— not suddenly, not dramatically—but gently, step by step. Looking back now, I can see that the closed door was actually God’s protection. The delay was God’s preparation and the redirection was God’s grace and care for me. What I thought was a setback became a deeper place of trust. And that’s when our text stopped being just a verse I quoted and became a truth I lived: When we stop leaning on ourselves and truly trust God, 

He does direct our paths—often in ways we could not have planned, but always in ways that are better, much, much better."

Interpreting Khrimian Hayrig's Iron Ladle Speech

Vaհe H Apelian.

“139 years have passed but the Armenian ladle still is not of iron”, I heard Hayk Konjoryan say, when I came across him for the first time nine years ago when he was a candidate as a deputy to Armenia’s National Assembly on behalf of the “They Way Out-Yelk” party. My records indicate that it was on January 1, 2017 when he presented his candidacy to an audience of around 600 people in a town hall filled to capacity. He had chosen Khrimian Hayrig’s famous “Iron Ladle” speech as the theme of his election campaign. Hayk Konjoryan, with a metal saddle in his hand, was claiming that “139 years have passed but the Armenian ladle still is not of iron”. 

In his speech Hayk Konjoryan went on arguing that the answer for an iron ladle,  is not a strong army alone, because a strong army without a strong a government is self-defeating.  Nor, he argued the answer is a strong government. Because, he said, a strong government with a weak army is ineffective.  Neither the answer, he further stated, can be a strong army and a strong government. Because these two institutions, strong army and a strong government, cannot long endure if the state’s economy is weak. He went on noting to his audience that, 2000 of such capacity filled halls, totaling 1.2 million citizens have left the country arguing that they did not want to leave their homeland but they turned their backs to their unjust and corrupt government, weakening the state. 

As I look at that speech, he appears to be younger than his 30 years old age. What struck me was his interpretation of the ladle (paper?) speech.  He came across to me wiser for his young age. The common message that has been carried from Khrimian Hayrig is to resort to gun as the most assured way for the Armenians to have their rightful national grievances heard and their rightful goals achieved. But this young man’s interpretation of the Khrimian Hayrig’s message was far more in depth than what I was accustomed and expected to hear. That is why I opted to archive the speech in my Facebook account (see the link below)..

At the present, Hayk Konjoryan is a mature, experienced, seasoned member of the National Assembly of Armenia and he is a forceful proponent of the ruling Civil Contract party that has proven to be an ideologically cohesive group thus far.  No Armenian leader and political party in the very recent history have been so tested as Nikol Pashinyan and his Civil Contract party and remained cohesive with a vision.

In fact, I liken the inexperienced young men they were - Nikol Pashinyan, Hayk Konjoyan, Ararat Mirzoyan, Araik Haroutiunyan, Vahagn Alexanyan and others - to the young revolutionaries that became statesmen as the founders of the First Republic of Armenia. I draw a parallel between the two in their political and foreign policy pragmatism to assure the longevity of the Republic of Armenia. I trust them and I wish them well.

 

The evolution of Hayk Konjoryan

 Vaհe H Apelian

Hayk Konjoryan delivering his "iron paddle" speech with a metal ladle in his hand

I came across Hayk Konjoryan for the first time nine years ago when he was a candidate for National Assembly deputy from Arabkir, Ajapnyak, Davitashen communities on behalf of the “They Way Out-Yelk” party.

My records indicate that it was on January 1, 2017 when he presented his candidacy to an audience of around 600 people in a town hall filled to capacity. The theme of his speech was the famous speech Khrimian Hayrig gave after he returned from the Berlin Conference as the head of the Armenian delegation. Hayk Konjoryan, with a metal ladle in his hand, was claiming that “139 years have passed but the Armenian ladle still is not of iron”. 

The argument Hayk Konjoryan put forth was his view as to why the Armenian ladle is still not of iron after 139 years. He went on arguing that the answer is not a strong army alone, because a strong army without a strong a government is self-defeating.  Nor, he argued the answer is a strong government when its army is weak. A strong government with a weak army is inefective.  Neither the answer, he claimed, is a strong army and a strong government, when the economy is weak. These two institutions will not long endure in a weak economy, he emphatically noted.

 He went on noting to his audience that, 2000 of such capacity filled halls, totaling 1.2 million citizens have left the country arguing that they did not want to leave their homeland but they turned their backs to their unjust and corrupt government. 

As I look at that speech, he appears to be younger than his 30 years old age. What struck me was his interpretation of the ladle (paper?) speech.  He came across to me wiser for his young age. The common message that has been carried from Khrimian Hayrig is to resort to gun as the most assured way for the Armenians to have their rightful national grievances heard and their rightful goals achieved. But this young man’s interpretation of the Khrimian Hayrig’s message was far more in depth than what I was accustomed and expected to hear. That is why I opted to archive the speech in my Facebook account (see the link below).

The Armenian Wikipedia notes the following about him:

Hayk Konjoryan was born in 1987 in the city of Charentsavan, Soviet Armenia. In 2008, he graduated from the Faculty of History of Yerevan State University, and in 2010, he completed his master's degree at the Faculty of History of Yerevan State University. In 2013, he completed his postgraduate studies in world history.

Hayk Konjoryan is married. The couple has a daughter.

One year after his speech, he also took his step as junior to with Ararat Mirzoyan (born in 1979), Araiik Haroutiunyan (born in 1979), led by Nikol Pashinyan (born in 1975) who  brought about the 2018 peaceful revolution in Armenia, known as the Velvet Revolution. It has always been the young and idealists that have changed the course of their nation as this Independence Generation did in Armenia. It should be noted that there is a generation gap between the principals of the Civic Contract party governing Armenia and the opposition led by Levon Ter Petrosyan (born in 1946), Robert Kocharyan (born in 1954), Serzh Sargsyan (born in 1954).

At the present Hayk Konjoryan is a mature, experienced, seasoned member of the National Assembly of Armenia and is a forceful proponent of the ruling Civil Contract party that has proven to be an ideologically cohesive group thus far.  No Armenian leader and political party in the very recent history have been so tested as Nikol Pashinyan and his Civil Contract party, ever since they brought about the change in 2018. 

I liken the inexperienced young men they were - Nikol Pashinyan, Hayk Konjoyan, Ararat Mirzoyan, Araik Haroutiunyan, Vahagn Alexanyan and others - to the young civic activists and revolutionaries that became statesmen as the founders of the First Republic of Armenia. I draw a parallel between the two in their political and foreign policy pragmatism to assure the longevity of the Republic of Armenia. 

I trust them and I wish them well.

 

Integrating national values and character

Vaհe H Apelian

AI generated

Vahan Zanoyan needs no introduction. He is an accomplished person and not an indifferent Armenian.  I read in  the Mirror-Spectator, his latest personal article about Ruben Vardanyan and the syndrome of indifference, I imagine his article will likely be reproduced by other Armenian publications. While the article is personal and has to do with the syndrome of indifference, but it sure is part and parcel of a greater whole which is our national values and character. Vahan remains concerned of their erosion under Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan.

He wrote: “An Armenia stripped of its national character and values is already defeated, even if in peace with its neighbors, because it would be a sterilized Armenia, a skeleton, just a map without a soul—indifferent to its history, culture, rights, identity and, most of all, to its national dignity. I know there are many who will mock these thoughts, and they will base their mockery on “what did we achieve with 34 years of senseless struggle,” but our history is much longer than 34 years. Our struggle is longer than three thousand years. 34 years is nothing but a blink in the history of nations. Nations prevail because they keep the will to struggle.”

Personalizing it on my end, I will note that Vahan and I are of the same generation, although he is younger than I. Both of us attended the same Armenian school in Beirut. I do not think that there is an Armenian, who will comment contrary to the statement he made. But the issue should not be presented with such a statement.

Armenian Evangelical College High School Science Club

What are our national values and character?  

Our national values and character are matters that cannot be summed up in a paragraph or two. But, for the sake of simplification, I will sum it up in a sentence or two. Our national values and character are hinged on our standing by, and upholding the three Rs: Recognition of the genocide and the historical wrong that was done to us; Restitution of what is historically ours but has been usurped from us; Reparation of what cannot be restituted but compensated to help the Armenian nation recover from the mortal wound. 

To further simplify, it is fair and right to note that the crux of our national values and character has two distinct aspects – what we can integrate into state policy, and what we should uphold and retain as individuals. Both are highly demanding commitments. The state has a responsibility for keeping the Republic of Armenia safe and secure in a tumultuous region. The Armenian as an individual has a responsibility to uphold and retain what has been passed to the person through, no less tumultuous long Armenian history.

Regarding the Armenian state, nothing of substance has changed since May 28, 1918 to this very day. To be more precise, from June 4, 1918, seven days after May 28, when Armenia signed the Treaty of Batumi and not long after went to Istanbul and thanked no other than the butcher himself, Talaat Pasha for making the republic of Armenia possible. These are happenings and not interpretations. 

But what has changed is the public outspokenness of the Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan for baring to public the stark reality of the Armenia’s policies to secure Armenia and also his outspoken quest for Armenia’s “prosperity”. I do not need to elaborate on the Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan blunt outspokenness. Consider it to be blunt pragmatism. The state of Armenia is continuing to do its job from get-go to this day, by not integrating onto the Armenia’s state policies the 3 Rs – the Recognition, the Restitution, and the Reparation.

As to Armenia’s quest for property, it should not be viewed within the context of Western prosperity. Armenia is an impoverished country. Poverty is endemic in Armenia. Armenia needs to provide bread, in the biblical sense - “give us this day our daily bread” - for sustenance, so that Armenians will be able to make a living and get by to stay put in Armenia and not join Vahan and I in far distant lands.

But regrettably, the individual Armenians and the ad hoc groups of Armenian individuals as cultural, athletic, academic and what not organizations, are failing. 

The individual failing is not only with Armenians. The trend of seeking solutions by the state and from the state, is pandemic, if you will allow me the use the term pandemic.

If we are to retain our republic, we have to know the difference between, what the state of Armenia can integrate in its state policy from what we term as “national values and character”; and what the Armenian individual should retain from the same -  “national values and character” - onto itself. Knowledge is at the fingertips of any one of us. 

The wisdom of knowing the difference of integrating national values and character by Armenia and integrating by Armenians, may help Armenia and Armenians from self-destructive politics.