Gaïdz Minassian
And now, the surveillance of Dashnak activists in social media….. where are we heading?
Harout Kalaydjian, a veteran of the party, settled in Armenia for a few years, after having traveled through Lebanon and Canada, learned in July 2020 that he was dismissed from the Dashnaktsoutioun party, after a punitive procedure by a disciplinary commission, established by the Supreme Authority of the ARF of Armenia.
One more, you will say… And for what reason? NO REASON.
The accusation is based on having private correspondence with individuals, some of them ARF members others independent people, transmitted through Facebook Messenger. This correspondence is public information and overall, it questions the political line of the ARF in Armenia.
In other words, “forwarding” texts leads to the exit door, nothing else!
While Chinese and North Koreans spend billions of dollars to control internal debates on social media but fail to do so; the Dashnaktsoutioun leadership in Armenia believes it can do it by relying on the “discipline” of its members. But that is like erecting a beaver dam in front of a river that has risen from its bed.
There are no barriers to prevent people from expressing themselves, and circulating their opinions … None. Even if the ARF uses the thought police (Thinkpol), it will fail.
The ARF is the first Armenian political force whose members were persecuted for crimes of opinion. From the Ottoman Empire to Bolshevik Russia, from authoritarian Arab-Muslim regimes to Ter Petrosian’s regime, ARF activists have a long history of being subjected to liberticidal policies.
Nevertheless, the current position of the ARF appeals to several constituents. In the absence of any nuance and in a grid of sanctions, Harout Kalaydjian and Aghvan Vartanian, a Dashnak anchor who publicly posted his discord with members of the provisional governing body of Nikol Pachinyan, are excluded. One is reserved for obsessive motives, the other being the discipline of millions of Armenians in the street or before their television, but both of them are fraught with the same disciplinary sanction.
The capacity of the Dashnak party to accommodate competition is largely based on the culture of exclusion. In revolutionary parties, hardened with clandestine activities, disciplinary measures are often frequent. However, at the level of principle, the culture of exclusion is not enforced; because it exacerbates tensions, amplifies currents and aggravates the internal crises that regresses the party. In other words, exclusion is not a ‘force majeure’ but constitutes a pressure valve, an impulse.
· During the time of Christapor, criticism and public discord was tolerated. When Karekin Khajag criticized Christapor in the Dachnakstagan Press of the Balkans some years before the death of the founder of the ARF, he did not end up with an exclusion procedure.Christapor wrote to him: “From now on, I will no longer work with you”
· When Mikael Varandian criticized, in the Dashnakstagan press during the 1920s, the narrow mindedness of some “Dashnakstagans, neither the World Bureau, nor the world Congress resorted to sanctions to resolve the conflict.
· In 1933, Schavarsh Missakian, a member of the World Bureau (1924-1929) and editor-in-chief of “Haratch” in France, criticized the ARF for ordering the slaying of archbishop Leo Tourian in the United States in 1933. The criticism was sanctioned by the party.
· Most recently, in 1991, Vahé Ochagan published in Asbarez, an organ of the ARF in California, an article bitterly condemning the ARF policy in Armenia.
But where are the Ochagans of the 21st century?
Are they silent or are they being silenced?
This censorship is part of Bolshevik practices by individuals returning to communist values in post-Soviet Armenia. These people are “Dashnaktsagans” in name only, and these recipes are vignettes of Stalinism.
Do these Armenian conductors work on their own account or for other directors?
Are they familiar with the dictatorial methods of the Dashnaks revisionists as Roupen Ter Minassian, the main artist of the purge of the “Markots” movement in France during the 1930s?
In reality, the hour is grave and there are a multitude of serious issues at the root of the ARF.
We are facing a crisis with no visible solution.
There is a Crisis in the party.
The ARF leadership in Yerevan says: “What crisis ?!”.
There is a Hemorrhage of militancy. The ARF leadership in Yerevan says: “What kind of hemorrhage ?!”
There is a total absence of perspective for the ARF policy, but again and again the ARF leadership in Yerevan says: “But, what kind of absence are you talking about ?!”.
The Dashnaktsgan house is burning, and the “main structure” (mayr garouïts) of ARF in Yerevan says: “but what kind of fire are you talking about?!
Leadership control is through ideas and conviction, not a policy of fear. It is through the propagation of ideas and the adoption of cooperative & inclusive methods that an organization and its leadership thrive.
In reality the ARF of Armenia is rung by gangrene, and this takes a toll on its members and family. Doctors and family members do not know what remedy to adopt. They are facing a dilemma:
· Take the risk of a major surgical operation to cut the necrosis limb of the patient while acknowledging that this surgery has major risks and might not be successful;
· Avoid the amputation procedure which might result in spreading of the gangrene to the whole body and eventually kill the patient.
So, what is to be done?
Do you want to resign with the electoral failures of a quarter century or react to forestall the eventual death of the wonderful idea of Christoporian federalism?