Groups and organizations are in full gear to develop strategies in defining the paternity of the 1918 Republic of Armenia, as if partisanship did not have its own share of calamity to rise again at this juncture. It would be a more honorable task to place the First Republic on a pan-Armenian pedestal rather than to claim it for a particular group, nourishing proprietary partisanship and ignoring and underestimating the contributions of other groups in the emergence of that First Republic.
The Third Republic was born during complex historical developments as did the First Republic.
During the last full century, the Caucasus region was shaken by major tribulations which came to define the destiny of many nations.
Many historic facts were imposed on the countries of the region. Although most of those historic developments were beyond the grasp of those nations, their leadership still played a role in riding the tides of history.
The liberation of Nagorno Karabakh was also one such opportunity of nabbing the brass ring of history. For centuries Armenians were subjected to losses — both human life and homeland — so much so that losing was perceived to be the destiny. But the recovery of Karabakh was an event that changed the course of that destiny. Armenians were able to detour that destiny and recover a slice of lost historic territory which was returned to its rightful owner, the Armenian people.
Who can claim the liberation of Karabakh is not a result of the elemental drive of the Armenian people? Political parties and other groups which had led many campaigns to liberate Karabakh ended up playing a marginal role in the recovery of that historic land. The same can be said about the birth of the Third Republic.
Let us not forget that our political parties were conditioned psychologically to avoid any separation from Russia, fearing disaster. The collapse of the Soviet Union was met with fear and trepidation, if not resentment. Thus, the traditional parties were left on the margins, at the birth of this Third Republic.
Upon the collapse of the Soviet Empire, an intellectual leadership was already in place to assume its role. It is wise to remember a statement by a Tashnag (ARF) leader, namely the late Hrair Maroukhian, who said: “We came to Armenia to bring our share and our extended hand for help remained in the air.”
That statement is very symbolic of the help (or lack thereof) of the traditional political parties in the birth of the Third Republic. The creation of the First Republic was markedly dissimilar, although the international situation during the years 1988-89 were very similar.
It would be a historic misstatement to deny the critical role of the ARF leaders and structures in the birth of the First Republic, especially during the self-defense war of Sardarabad, Kara Kilissa and Bash Aparan, which heralded the birth of the First Republic.
Today, it’s time to give credit to all groups which contributed to the rebirth of Armenian statehood, without marginalizing the other parties.
In one of his poems, pleading with the creator, Omar Khayyam asks: “My Lord, if I sin and you punish me, then what is the difference between you and me?”
Similarly, if we try to blame the deniers, what would be our difference from them?
When the Transcaucasian Seym (Parliament) was dissolved under Turkish pressure, Armenia was left alone to face the Turkish threat. Therefore, the battle of Sardarabad proved to be a watershed, which defined the life and death of the Armenian people. The entire nation rose for self-defense, mobilizing its army, the peasants, the clergy and the intellectuals, and under the leadership of Generals Silikyan and Dro, stopped the Turkish onslaught on Armenia’s border.
Despite the military victory, the birth of statehood was greeted with fear and sorrow, as succinctly described in Simon Vratsian’s book, The Republic of Armenia. Then the difficult task of state-building began, with problems at home and abroad. Armenians who were spread around the world joined in a last-ditch effort to help Armenia survive, a country which claimed to become a democratic republic, enlisting the combined forces of all political factions. Aram Manoukian was in charge of internal security, while Ruben Ter Minassian was to engage in a most far-reaching goal. Indeed, when in 1914 the European powers finally forced the Ottoman rulers to accept six European rulers for the Armenian villayets and also, when the mission of US Gen. Harbord was tasked with designing the map of constituent minorities of the defeated Ottoman Empire, leading to the Sevres Treaty, they were led by the ethnic plurality of the regions to be assigned to minorities. This priority goaded Ruben Ter Minassian to assure that Armenia’s ethnic profile favored its indigenous people.
The democratic character of the First Republic was mostly formed with the participation of the People’s Party (Joghovurtagan) which assumed responsible roles in the first parliament and the cabinet. The leadership of that party was composed of intellectual giants such as Stepan Malkhasian and Leo. Also in leadership roles were Enfiejian, Babajanian and Arakelian, the latter assassinated by the ARF.
The People’s Party continued to support the government even after it was forced out, when the ARF imposed a one-party rule, a year later.
Today, Armenia counts on the support of the diaspora. But today’s support pales in comparison to the support the diaspora extended during the First Republic.
As the ARF took the helm of the government, it struggled to rule through internal problems and external threats. But by so doing, the party also assumed the responsibility of the consequences of its actions.
Thus, the People’s Party, which maintained the democratic nature of the government, was neutralized.
After dreaming about an independent Armenian homeland for six centuries, the entire Armenian people was mobilized to contribute to Armenia’s survival. When Foreign Minister Alexander Khadissian toured Istanbul and Egypt on a fundraising tour, the Ramgavars (ADL) were at the forefront of the contributors. When the Turkish threat still loomed on Armenia’s border, the party decided to purchase an air armada of 20 war planes from the British army. But when its fortunes turned in the Caucasus, the British government refused to deliver the planes. Had that airforce arrived at its destination, Armenia’s borders would have a different shape today.
Political developments in Armenia also neutralized the roles of the Armenian National Delegation headed by Boghos Nubar and the foremost national hero, Antranik.
On December 2, Dro and Derderian joined the Revolutionary Committee to share power with the Communist party; the ARF technically surrendered its role to the Soviets, peacefully. But the imprudent revolt in February 1921 caused the death of thousands of Armenian youth and sealed Armenia’s border until today.
Of course, judgement is easy in hindsight. After a full century, the historic facts can be viewed much more clearly.
It is time to judge history coolly and define the roles of parties and their leaders through an objective perspective, giving due credit to each one and assigning to them also the responsibility for their actions.
(This commentary originally appeared in Armenian as the editorial of Baikar weekly.)
