«Փոփոխությունների շարժիչ ուժը» (շարունակություն) - Կարեն ԱՂԵԿՅԱՆ

Karen Agekyan's article "The Driving Force of Change" (continuation) is devoted to a critical analysis of two interrelated phenomena in contemporary Armenian diaspora politics: the activities of the self-established "authorized bodies" of Western Armenia and the widespread ideology of a "legal solution" to the Armenian Question.

Introduction and Methodology

The author continues the study, begun in previous parts, of the external challenges facing Armenians, and distinguishes among the people's responses those forces that are healthy from those that are destructive. Particular attention is paid to the danger of declarations that sound patriotic but in essence disorient the national movement.

The "Authorized Bodies" of Western Armenia

Agekyan examines in detail the contents of the "Declaration of the National Council" of February 4, 2011, adopted by structures such as the "Government of Western Armenia in Exile." The author points to a number of fundamental problems:

the absence of a legitimate procedure for electing the "Council" and appointing "ministers";
the appropriation of exclusive rights to dispose of the lands, resources, and historical heritage of Western Armenia on behalf of Armenians who were never consulted;
declarative "citizenship" and promises of "protection and patronage" with no real institutional backing;
the absence of any actual structures — grassroots organizations, systems of governance, resources — capable of substantiating claims to power.

The author ironically demonstrates the unrealistic nature of the guarantees declared (freedom of speech, an army, a judicial system) in the absence of any "territory under jurisdiction." The key conclusion of this section is that the main danger of such "projects" lies not in the personal ambitions of their participants, among whom there are also sincere patriots, but in their ideological foundation: the attempt to create an alternative center of Armenianness outside Yerevan and to substitute declarative rhetoric for real political struggle.

Legal Self-Hypnosis

The second section of the article is devoted to a critique of the concept of resolving the Armenian Question through the "international legal plane," as presented, in particular, by A. Papyan and T. Pashabezyan. Agekyan disputes the thesis of Armenia's "legal advantage," citing examples such as:

the absence of historical precedents for resolving large-scale national questions solely through legal means;
the selective application of international law by world powers (recognition of states, nuclear weapons, war crimes);
the fate of the Treaty of Sèvres as an example of the impotence of legal acts without the backing of force.

The author draws a parallel with the policy of Armenian forces in 1912–1914, who staked everything on diplomatic combinations without mobilizing the people, which became one of the factors leading to the Genocide. International law is interpreted as an instrument for formalizing actual power, not as an independent source of justice.

Key Conclusion

The article concludes with the thesis that replacing real political struggle — ideological work, organizational building, agitation — with legal acrobatics and self-proclaimed "governments" represents a systemic threat to the Armenian national movement, since it creates the illusion of resolving the question without the corresponding will and force needed to achieve it in practice.