Times Of Trouble: The Armenian Communities Of Lebanon And Syria Between Old And New Challenges

Times Of Trouble: The Armenian Communities Of Lebanon And Syria Between Old And New Challenges

Dr Nicola Migliorino

Write-up by Leon Aslanov

MassisPost 20/3/2016

The crises that we have been witnessing in the Middle East for the past

few years, especially in Syria, have made the discussion of Armenian

communities in this region highly pertinent, and this was the topic

of lecture given by Dr Nicola Migliorino, on Monday 8 February 2015

at SOAS, University of London, who earned his PhD from the Institute

of Arab and Islamic Studies, University of Exeter. His research has

focused on Lebanon, Syria, and questions concerning ethno-cultural

diversity in the contemporary Arab world. Between 1998 and 2000 he

worked for an international NGO assisting Palestinian refugees in

Syria. Most recently he has held positions as Assistant Professor in

International Studies at Al Akhawayn University in Ifrane, Morocco,

and as an independent researcher and consultant.

Migliorino's first encounter with Armenians occurred when he was

working with Palestinians at an NGO in Syria. He noticed unique traits

of the Armenians in these lands. Their language, culture and history

stood in contrast to the local inhabitants of the region, and yet,

the Armenian communities did not seem to be alienated or marginalized

from the mainstream. They have been involved in all areas of life,

especially in Lebanon. This includes the arts, trade and, most

surprisingly of all, in politics - the domain in which a minority,

especially one that has arrived from elsewhere, is least likely to

be visible.

Migliorino recounted two stories that are told in parallel in his book,

(Re)Constructing Armenia in Lebanon and Syria: Ethno-Cultural Diversity

and the State in the Aftermath of a Refugee Crisis (Berghahn Books,

2008). The first story relates to a mass of Armenian refugees thrown

into predominantly Arab lands who then started to adopt a mission to

preserve their nation in exile. Migliorino used the term 'permanent

diaspora', coined by Khachig Tölöyan. The permanent diaspora

emerged once refugees ceased to be a mass and became communities with

institutions and associations. As is noted in the title of his book,

Armenians did a lot of work not only to reconstruct their culture,

but also to construct new forms of identity.
The second story tells how Armenian communities lived within the

Lebanese and Syrian states. How did Armenians interact with these

political entities? How did they negotiate with these states in order

to preserve their identity? These are important questions since the

Lebanese and Syrian states themselves are rather novel innovations

first managed as colonial outposts of France which, after the Second

World War, were deemed postcolonial states attempting to form unified

identities.

Migliorino postulated that the Armenians have managed to find their

place within the Lebanese and Syrian states, but that their experiences

have differed in the two countries. In Lebanon, the Armenians are

much more visible. They are accepted as one of the players within

the consociational politics of Lebanon.
Consociationalism, a term coined by political scientist Arend

Lijphart, denotes power-sharing negotiations between the elites of

individual ethnic groups within a diverse society. Armenians, thus,

have a stake in the power-sharing that exists in the heterogeneous

society of Lebanon.
In Syria, the situation is rather different. The Armenians have no

formal role in Syrian politics. But despite their negligible presence

in the public sphere, Armenians have been able to survive and thrive:

they have been able to implement their own cultural projects; to

teach Armenian in schools; and to preserve their political identities

(such as the Tashnagtsoutyun), as long as all of this is done without

much visibility in the public sphere.
>From the outside, such arrangements seem generous towards the

Armenians. However, it is not necessarily out of altruism that

Lebanon and Syria have welcomed Armenian immigrants; rather, the

Armenians have been beneficial to each state in reinforcing their

legitimacy. An inflow of Christians to shift the balance between

Muslims and Christians has been useful for both.

How permanent are these agreements? Are they sustainable for

Armenians? The upheavals and transformations that Lebanon and Syria

went through during the twentieth century, especially the Lebanese

Civil War and the nationalist Arabization project in Syria, seem not

to have had a significantly negative impact on Armenian communities.
On the other hand, Migliorino cited economic crises as a primary

threat to the existence of these Armenian communities. There is a

critical mass that is required for Armenian communities to survive.
For schools there must be students; for publishing houses there must

be readers, and such establishments close when the critical mass is

not met. In other words, there is a shrinking of the 'Armenian market'

and, thus, a gradual shrinking of Armenian communities.

This issue led Migliorino to explore the more general question of what

it means to preserve cultural identity. He mentioned two ways it may

be preserved: as a museum, or as a living entity. If one perceives the

inevitable end of a culture, it may be wise to preserve its language

and particular characteristics as artefacts for future generations

to refer to. If there is a chance to save a culture from extinction

then there must be a proactive effort among the existing community

to enliven the culture. Although there are multiple aspects to any

culture, Migliorino and members of the audience agreed that language

is of the utmost importance, whether it is preserved as a living,

breathing language, or as a dormant one.
In 2011, when the revolts within Syria began, Migliorino had an ominous

view of what was to come. He envisaged a great threat to the presence

of the Armenian communities of Syria. The role of Armenians in these

revolts has been negligible. They do not belong to these uprisings,

apart from individual exceptions in the initial phase.
Generally these revolts are actually a challenge to community

interests, and therefore we are seeing a slow exodus of Armenians from

Syria at the moment, despite efforts to keep the communities together.
Unity in a time of crisis is difficult for Armenians in Syria,

since the communities are not concentrated in one area and they do

not constitute a visible political force.
The future of Armenians in the Middle East seems bleak, and Migliorino

shared with us a somewhat pessimistic view of what is to come. There

is no way of predicting whether Syria might become a unified political

entity in the future, so the wisest standpoint to take is simply an

apprehensive one.
http://massispost.com/2016/03/times-of-trouble-the-armenian-communities-of-lebanon-and-syria-between-old-and-new-challenges/