The study was conducted with funding from Sweden.
The content is the sole responsibility of Socioscope NGO.
The views expressed in the publication may not necessarily reflect the positions of the Swedish Government, the Women’s Resource Center, or the Women’s Fund Armenia.

The post The Gender Aspect of Poverty in Armenia in the Aftermath of Multiple Crises appeared first on Socioscope.

Traditionally, human rights have been a tool for marginalized and vulnerable groups to combat their own vulnerability, lead their existential struggle, voice their problems, formulate them, and live a more dignified life. However, in recent years, a new tendency is observed in the world, whereby the tools to speak about and voice the protection of human rights of vulnerable groups, injustices, inequality, and other issues have begun to be widely used by conservative and anti-democratic groups: a phenomenon that can have far-reaching negative effects on the perceptions and content of human rights. It goes without saying that the concept of human rights is not the property of any group, however, the use and active circulation of the concept of human rights by conservative, right-wing, nationalist, and some fascist groups, gives rise to some questions such as “to what extent are the activities of these actors in line with human rights norms and standards?” “is the use of human rights discourse by these groups legitimate and justified?” and “does the reference to human rights in the framework of anti-democratic, conservative issues actually benefit or harm the protection of human rights?”[4] In this context, one of the fundamental issues of human rights is not its so-called “weakness” but the “unintended consequences of the success” of human rights, as a result of which reactionary, conservative and anti-democratic groups have adopted and widely use the human rights discourse.[5] In view of this, it is important to state that in recent years the right-wing, conservative, nationalist groups, among them also anti-gender groups spreading misogynistic and homophobic rhetoric, have been politically expanding in many countries across the world. In the span of these expansions, the above groups target progressive civil society, individual activists, and human rights defenders on a variety of occasions and in diverse contexts.

These phenomena are not new in Armenia where these campaigns and initiatives gained more momentum and intensity after the Velvet Revolution in 2018.[6] After the Revolution, anti-gender campaigns in Armenia aggressively manipulate issues of public sensitivity, target human rights defenders and representatives of civil society dealing with those issues in order to fight against the ruling power, develop anti-government sentiments and increase their own role in domestic political life.[7] As in many countries in the world, in Armenia also, transformations and changes have been observed in the strategies and activities of these campaigns in recent years. They attempt to present themselves as a real civil society questioning the agency and actual objectives of the organizations and human rights defenders who have been active in the field of human rights protection for years. “Anti-movements,” conservative, right-wing campaigns and movements are relatively new trends in the context of classic movements – the feminist movement, social movements for labor, political and civil rights.

In the framework of this article, we will try to understand why “newcomers” position themselves as representatives of civil society and what objectives they pursue, why they use specifically human rights, the language and framework of human rights to achieve their objectives, how and why they choose this or that issue and this or that method of influencing the public and decision-makers on those issues. To reveal these, we have applied Ron Dudai’s analytical classification of conservative and right-wing campaigns on the issue of human rights: entryism, mimicry, and victimhood work.[8] Within this article, we closely focus on the speculation on the issue of women’s rights identifying and analyzing the political positions, objectives, methods, and forms of struggle of these groups.

Entryism, or How Human Rights Conceal Political Objectives

Before the 2018 Velvet Revolution many human rights defenders, activists, and civil society representatives pictured and presented the environment of the civil society as “shrinking.” The bases for such qualification were not only the analysis of the environment in which civil society was functioning but also the legislative changes initiated in 2017-2018, initiatives implying negative consequences,[9] as well as the amendment of the Law on Non-Governmental Organizations in 2017 due to which, for instance, the possibility of environmental NGOs in Armenian courts was practically limited for protecting the public interest.[10] The shrinking of the space of civil society took place generally in the presence of formal democracy and relative free speech. In the context of the pre-revolutionary setting of civil society activity, it is essential to view the influence of Russia, local and international business organizations, as well as various state agencies and their financial resources in relation to forming an alternative, controlled civil society loyal to the authorities of the time that were promoting conservative agendas. These policies were implemented through the formation and enforcement of RONGO, BONGO, GONGO (Russian-Organized, Business-Organized, and Government-Organized NGO) type of civil society aimed at reproducing conservative ideology and values, paternalistic morals, anti-democratic and Russian controlling policy among the general public, as well as the patronage of some large business interests.[11]

The phenomenon of government- and business-organized civil society has been the focus of researchers’ attention over many years. Social scientists have conducted many studies on this issue, and the literature on the topic is diverse. “State marionettes,” and “ghost organizations” are very common across the world. They are usually organized, founded and supported by non-democratic regimes whose aim is to present an image of a free and viable civil society to the international community, silencing the voice of the “real civil society.” This was a particularly common practice in pre-revolutionary Armenia. Hence, representatives of various non-governmental organizations have repeatedly stated that the authorities of the time apparently talked in their meetings with various international institutions and organizations about the need for discussions of changes put forward by the government with all political forces and non-governmental organizations,[12] and signed memorandums[13] on ensuring the participation of civil society in the process of drafting laws but in practice, not only did they not consider the issues raised by the real civil society, but instead of resolving the raised issues, they introduced mechanisms to fight against the civil society and created GONGOs.[14] These organizations saw “positive changes”[15][16] in the elections with obvious electoral violations, met with the Government representatives at the highest level to promote their business interests, “presented the outcomes of their studies, made recommendations”,[17] “expressed satisfaction with appreciating their recommendations being included in the action plans,”[18] “received awards” for the contribution to the education of young people in a military-patriotic spirit”[19] and so on. These organizations signed memorandums of cooperation with the state and the authorities of the time at different levels which later the state presented in various instances as “real cooperation with the civil society,” or as evidence that the civil society was involved in the implementation of this or that reform.[20] It is noteworthy that the state, in the person of the RA President’s office, financed some non-governmental organizations to implement projects related to the fight against smoking, reproductive health, development of rural communities, the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, glorification of the present-day heroes, environmental protection and other topics.[21] However, later on, we learned from investigative journalists that the NGOs that received the largest grants from the RA President’s Office were founded and run[22] by people with the same name and surname, the legal address of the registration of some of the different NGOs was the same, but the latter did not operate,[23] they did not provide any activities or services[24] under the announced and granted projects, etc.

Some non-governmental organizations which did not have any significant contribution or activities in the field of human rights or democracy, presented counterfeit grant projects to the office of the European Union delegation, after which they plundered particularly large amounts of money allocated to grant projects.[25] And it was a long-standing practice that the authorities presented the interactions with these NGOs, GONGOs in various formats in international instances, in discussions about the implementation of recommendations, as cooperation with civil society.

Since the authorities preferred to present the interaction with the NGOs they created and financed as “real cooperation with the civil society,” they left out the representatives of the progressive civil society from potential processes, and fought against them, shrinking the space of ​​their free activity. In such conditions, the activists and groups engaged in the protection of human rights, the human rights civil society raised the issues in the country through the relevant international organizations and advocated that these international organizations issue recommendations to the state for the introduction of various international mechanisms aimed at improving human rights. Subsequently, civil society monitored their implementation at the local level through international tools. This tactic, however, was constantly criticized by right-wing groups and the authorities of the time for “bringing a goon squad” on the country and “airing the dirty laundry.”[26] It is interesting to note that after the Velvet Revolution in 2018, some former officials started to establish non-governmental organizations.[27][28] Politicians critical of this tactic of the civil society are now repeating this practice,[29] using the mechanisms and tools[30] of the fight for human rights to advance their narrow political interests but intruding and packaging them under the guise of protecting human rights and freedoms. It is also interesting to note that in their reports, these newly created non-governmental organizations not only criticize the policies of the authorities or the lack of them but also refer to the reports of the progressive civil society and try to counterbalance them, presenting themselves as a real civil society.[31]

Another common form of intrusion is when new organizations and initiatives formed by satellites of the former political elite positioned to the right from center, participate in human rights or progressive civil society events to promote their own agendas through speeches or acts of protest. Usually, they video-record everything and leave, after which they actively share the videos on their social media pages. On the one hand, such actions aim to “spoil” the events of the progressive civil society, while on the other hand, these groups try to reach the audience of the progressive civil society and the wider public with this practice, therefore video recording is a mandatory accompaniment to all these acts.

It is important to consider that these forms of encroachment acquired a continuous nature and solid from 2013 when anti-gender campaigns became part of the Armenian political agenda. In 2014, a number of neo-nationalist and extremist groups with “No to anti-family propaganda,” “Homofascism will not pass” and other posters tried to encroach and disrupt the round table discussion organized by Society Without Violence NGO on the topic of “Inclusion of the Gender Component in the Textbooks of the Subject “Sociology.”[32] People from the same group later encroached and recorded various discussions organized by civil society organizations and international organizations mainly related to women’s rights, sexual and reproductive health and rights, sexuality and gender issues, and LGBT rights. After the Revolution, these groups continued the practice of intrusion in the context of anti-gender, anti-Soros campaigns. Thus, after the Revolution, we witness how these groups regularly appear at the events organized by civil society (especially when Open Society Foundations-Armenia is involved in the organization or implementation of these events), give speeches accusing civil society organizations of “being a foreign agent,”[33] “instructing the police and promoting the interests of their group.” [34] They also tried to encroach on the social rights initiatives (e.g. alongside the activist initiative against the flat income tax bill, the right-wingers also began to fight against it).[35] as well as on the environmental movement to support activists fighting against the Amulsar gold mining project[36] (which they were not allowed to do). It is noteworthy, however, that a year ago the representatives of the same group presented those activists as “Sorosians and Soros daredevils[37] who, pretending to be environmentalists, were trying to take up the voicing of the Amulsar issue, but in fact, instead of the Amulsar issue, they were trying to start negotiations for the freedom of their murderous friends.”[38]

In the scope of women’s issues and gender equality topics, representatives of anti-gender campaigns encroached on public events organized on the topics of gender equality and women’s rights, gave speeches, and disrupted their normal course.

One of the most salient intrusions was into the public debate on the draft Law on Prevention of Domestic Violence in 2017. The Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Armenia published the draft Law of the Republic of Armenia on Prevention of Violence Within the Family, Protection of Victims of Violence within the Family and Restoration of Peace in the Family and initiated a public debate on the law, invited the civil society working in the field, representatives of organizations engaged in the protection of general human rights, and other interested citizens to raise their questions about the law, voice concerns, make recommendations and discuss them. During the public debate, the Minister of Justice, and the Human Rights Defender presented the draft law justifying the need for the adoption of the law, and after the official speeches, in the Q&A session, the representatives of anti-gender campaigns started a disturbance and dragging. They demanded that the moderators give them a right to make a speech as “they represented the opposing side,” and “they had no questions but speeches.”[39] Thus, disrupting the course of the event, “intruding into the stage,” pulling the microphone, and demanding to speak, four representatives of these groups were given time to make a speech. After the end of one of the speeches, the representatives of the anti-gender groups were not satisfied, they tried to continue their speeches, as a result of which the event finally went off course, the participants eventually left the hall, the discussion was discontinued, the speakers did not have a chance to speak. And the representatives of the civil society who had been advocating the adoption and importance of the law against domestic violence, working with the victims of domestic violence and their families for years, had in-depth knowledge of the latter’s problems, did not have the opportunity to raise their questions, present their concerns, make recommendations, as, to put it mildly, the text of the presented law was quite problematic and did not address the fundamental issues in the field of domestic violence.[40]

A similar practice of intrusion is quite common and continues even after the Revolution, and the targets of these intrusions are often the civil society organizations dealing with women’s rights and gender issues, the events organized by them during which the rhetoric of violence has also turned into physical violence in some episodes. One such example was the launch of the book “My Body is Private” organized by the Sexual Assault Crisis Center NGO during which the initiators of anti-gender campaigns intruded into the event area, disrupted the event, threw eggs at the organizers of the event insulting and ridiculing them which resulted in a scandal. Due to this, further launches and book discussions were canceled shrinking the space of civil society working on such sensitive topics as sexuality and gender.[41]

Mimicry and Copying

Right-wing and far-right groups in Armenia periodically selectively speculate on the concept of human rights in various situations mainly to serve their narrow political and economic interests. Moreover, these groups often refer to human rights in cases and circumstances where they try to force the state to promote the legal system to make decisions in their favor and to create some favorable conditions for them. Studies of various social movements, anti-gender or anti-legal campaigns show that center-right groups, representatives of anti-gender campaigns copy, mimic, and replicate the activities, methods, and tools of other groups engaged in the protection of human rights and representatives of progressive civil society considering them effective.

Mimicry and copying of practices in the field of a social movement are logical and mostly honest when organizations and initiatives engaged in similar activities copy the legal tactics, rhetoric, and strategies of other organizations in case they consider them successful, as well as when newly created organizations use the methodology of organizations with years of experience and success. However, the copying of the human rights practices and rhetoric by the right or far-right groups is not mimicry of an “admired peer” but that of a “hated opponent” in which “attraction” and “repulsion” are combined, “mimicking while repudiating.”[42] It is also important to note that this is one of those cases where groups with power and resources mimic progressive groups with scarce resources. This is “aggressive mimicry” – right-wing and far-right groups with resources and power appropriate the discourses, methodology, and tactics of less-resourced, ideologically progressive groups and use them to fight against the goals that progressive civil society is fighting to achieve.[43]

It should be specified that this process of mimicry and copying has nothing to do with the spread of human rights norms since its dominant function is to disrupt and undermine, as well as to create a counter-image to the activities and rhetoric of left-positioned human rights NGOs.

Mimicry and copying of practices are quite common in Armenia, they are diverse and copy the methodology and rhetoric, tools, and language of human rights movement. The topics are also diverse ranging from domestic politics to foreign policy, all the various human rights issues including sensitive ones, the protection of the rights of vulnerable groups which have been repeatedly manipulated to serve political or quasi-political agendas, and narrow group interests of some right-wing forces.

Among the most salient practices of mimicry and copying in recent years were the demonstrations organized by the Parliamentary opposition demanding the resignation of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan in 2022.[44] The representatives of the opposition and their supporters started the “Resistance Movement” after N. Pashinyan said during the 2021 annual performance report discussion of the Government Program in the National Assembly, “Today the international community tells us once again: lower your bar a little on the status of Nagorno Karabakh and you will ensure a great international consolidation around Armenia and Artsakh.”[45] The methodology and tools chosen by the “Resistance Movement” were compared by many to the methodology and tools[46] of the 2018 Velvet Revolution, namely holding demonstrations in France Square, blocking streets, marching from different cities to the capital, or marching in different parts of the capital, calls for decentralized actions and attempts to block the operation of the metro, live sessions, etc.[47] The choice of such methodology and tools by the “Resistance Movement” was interpreted as “mimicry for the purpose of seizing power”[48] since if they were successful in 2018, they could be successful now as well. Concurrently, it is interesting how the political forces that ridiculed the Revolution and the people who participated in the Revolution treating them with disregard, use the methods and tools of the revolutionary movement thinking that the use of these tools is the key to ousting those who came to power and taking over their post.

The manipulation of the rights of vulnerable groups, sensitive topics, especially sexuality and gender issues, and the mimicry and copying of the fight of the progressive civil society working in this sphere is a widespread phenomenon among right-wing groups. Moreover, this mimicry is on both methodological and rhetorical levels.

One of the most notable practices of copying in the field of sexuality and gender issues is the introduction of position papers or statements during the debates on various legislative drafts or conventions on the processes of adoption of these laws, or the signing and ratification of conventions in which right-wing groups formulate their counter-arguments in the legal language, in effect, distorting the legislation and interpreting it on an ad-hoc basis. Thus, in the field of protection of the interests of vulnerable groups, the representatives of the progressive civil society use the tools of making joint statements, and organizing petitions to draw the attention of decision-makers to these issues and to make the required recommendations for solving the identified issues. These tools have also begun to be widely used by conservative and right-wing groups fighting against the protection of the rights of vulnerable groups, gender rights protection, and gender equality.

Ara Zohrabyan, Chairman of the Chamber of Advocates of the Republic of Armenia, launched a petition in 2018 on change.org against the ratification of the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women and Domestic Violence, better known as the Istanbul Convention. The Change.org platform has brought together more than 440 million people across 196 countries who initiated petitions aimed at improving the situation of their communities or the country and protecting fundamental human rights and freedoms.[49] The petition against the ratification of the Istanbul Convention initiated by Ara Zohrabyan on the Change.org platform, however, was deleted a few days later by the website’s lawyers who claimed that hate speech was identified in the information in the section justifying the need for the petition.[50] After the suspension of the petition on Change.org, Ara Zohrabyan created a new website solely to mobilize people against the ratification of the Istanbul Convention. Ara Zohrabyan has made similar propositions more than once: he and his like-minded friends fought against the adoption of the Law on Domestic Violence, against the ratification of the Council of Europe Convention on Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse, the Lanzarote Convention, against homosexuality, etc. It should be noted that Ara Zohrabyan, the Chairman of the RA Chamber of Advocates, is the head of the executive body of Zartonk national Christian party founded in April 2021,[51] and in the “About Us” section of the party’s website, it is written that “… over years, the founders have actively fought against vicious phenomena and morals and protected national values. In particular, they showed a repudiating attitude towards the adoption processes and initiatives of the Domestic Violence bill (2017), the Istanbul Convention (2019-2020), the Lanzarote Convention (2020), and other bills.”[52] The party was founded in 2021 and participated in the snap Parliamentary elections held in June, and the party positioned itself as a “defender of the value system.”[53] It is obvious that the anti-human rights activities on such sensitive topics and its formulation as “defense of the national value system” is nothing but right-wing populism aimed at speculating on the issues of gender and sexuality to advance narrow political agendas and to win political credits and dividends.

In the global feminist movement, mass non-violent activities, particularly marches, demonstrations, pickets and similar methods of struggle have always been one of the most effective methods of fighting the patriarchal system, as well as raising women’s issues and resolving them. Feminist, and anti-capitalist movements across the world wage a massive struggle against all forms of discrimination against women, inequality, violence, and poverty, for economic justice, abortion, sexual and reproductive health and rights, protection of civil and political rights, as well as for mobilizing people around the protection of the rights of the groups considered sexual and gender minorities, and among women, doubly discriminated national minorities, people of different races, for overcoming the causes and consequences of systemic issues and many other issues consolidating the efforts of many grassroots groups, activists, and concerned people around these issues.[54] In Armenia as well, in the context of the struggle for women’s rights, marches, demonstrations, and pickets have been organized many times to publicize the issues of women’s rights, to draw the attention of decision-makers to these issues, and to find solutions. In particular, various organizations, initiatives, feminist activists, and coalitions dealing with the protection of women’s rights have organized and implemented public events on March 8, International Women’s Day, October 1, the National Day of Combating Domestic Violence,[55] and November 25, International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women and within the framework of the 16 days of activism against gender-based violence, [56] etc.

Conservative forces and right-wing and far-right groups use the methods of demonstrations, marches, pickets, and public events to target and discredit women, women’s rights organizations, and activists.

An example of mimicry or copying is the protest organized by women of right-wing groups on April 7, 2021. The women of this group started the protest in Charles Aznavour square and then moved towards the Government building demanding the resignation of the Government. “As you know, we have initiated an act of protest today against the capitulator authorities with the participation of women, girls, and Armenian mothers. The main aim of today’s protest is specifically to put the Turkish fez on the head of the Turkish-affiliated ruling group.” [57]

Some of the women tried to enter the Government building which the police prevented in some cases using disproportionate force. Thus, although the April 7th protest organized as part of the Motherhood and Beauty Day was largely attended by women, it did not aim to raise the issues of systemic discrimination and violence against women characteristic of the patriarchal system, but rather it pursued domestic political and party goals and voiced the political preferences of a group of women. Although the women participating in the protest were associated with groups that had long fought against gender equality, women and initiatives fighting against domestic violence and their values, had long considered the issue of women’s rights to be an agenda imposed by the West and destruction of Armenian culture, traditional family and value system, turned to these very organizations so that the latter would condemn the violence used against them, in which they themselves did not believe years ago. “There are NGOs that used to make a scandal and circulate statements about women’s rights. Why are they silent now that women are violently and brutally detained for voicing their public demand? “[58]

Interestingly, as in the case of entryism, in mimicry and copying practices also, the right-wing groups are targeting not only the authorities and their activities, but also the progressive civil society claiming to take over their place by discrediting their work, but not the role, as their goal is not the public welfare and well-being, the protection of the rights of all people but the promotion of the narrow political interests of their small group.

These groups say: “Let us state that civil society has never been established in Armenia and one of the main reasons for this is Western funding.”[59]“…We have been voicing for about three years that we don’t have a real civil society, we don’t have a human rights community, what we have are those who have declared themselves as human rights defenders, people dealing with women’s rights and human rights in general, they are self-proclaimed, infamous order executors. … They speak exclusively when the issue concerns their narrow interests.”[60] Progressive civil society, female human rights defenders, who, on the one hand, recognize and condemn violence, the disproportionate force used by the police, but on the other hand, emphasize the fact that the civil society should not give in to similar statements and manipulations, it should determine and implement its own agenda: “We should not let these people who occupy the space of the civil society drag us into their games. They lodge an aimless protest then they start crying out, “Where are the human rights defenders? They detained us, caught us, beat us. “It seems to me that this will always be there, and it is already an organized activity since already during the protest they look for the human rights defenders while a week ago they were discussing that they do not exist. This game is very well-known… Of course, violence is condemnable, and the disproportionate force of the police is condemnable, but on the other hand, we see who is fighting against what, and we should not be part of these manipulations. They have adopted an approach as to what civil society should do, when, in what cases, and what it should state, and they are trying to create such a situation for us that if we don’t comply with all that, we are not good human rights defenders, we are not feminist enough, etc. In other words, it seems that they decide how we should be human rights defenders.” [61]

Despite their pompous statements and efforts to present themselves as the real civil society, these groups were not involved in the fight against human rights violations until the Velvet Revolution. These violations are thoroughly documented in the reports of both local and international organizations and the Human Rights Defender. At the same time, these groups have not been involved in the protection of human rights even after the Revolution. They simply use the language and tools of human rights in their struggle for power and claim to “replace” the groups they are fighting against.

In the post-war context, some nationalist groups, presenting themselves as “nationalist left-wing feminists or nationalist leftists, “regularly make statements through which they try to “save real feminism from human rights defenders.” They seek to discredit female human rights defenders, accuse them of not responding to their agenda or responding selectively, belittling the important role that female human rights defenders and women’s rights organizations have in society.[62]

There has been a long-standing debate among feminist researchers about whether feminism, nationalism, and militarism can intersect. Thus, the rationale of militarization and war is inherently gendered, and nationalism and militarism are based on the (re)production of gender hierarchies. On the one hand, feminist researchers in recent years have shown in their studies that militarized nationalist projects can mobilize women’s political participation, and be inclusive for women. On the other hand, these studies highlight that in these movements the space for discussing and criticizing gender equality and inclusiveness of women, change of gender relations and norms in a broad sense is already limited. Furthermore, nationalist and militarist movements do not even set such goals. Concurrently, it is not ruled out that feminist movements may be involved in nationalist and militaristic projects, and may coexist with armed groups. This does not at all mean that militarism and nationalism are beneficial and conducive to women and feminist policies. On the contrary, since both the ideology and practice of militarism and nationalism are based on gender hierarchies, women are subordinated and serve these agendas.[63]

Copying and mimicry of the techniques of human rights discourse and activities of human rights organizations is an attempt by conservative groups to expand their activities, repertoire of actions, as well as discourses. It should be noted that conservative agendas and policies have been evolving rapidly in recent years but the forces and movements promoting them are not satisfied with the results they have achieved, so they are also using the principles and methodology of the struggle of the left-wing groups to achieve their goals.

Using Human Rights for Victimhood Work

The abuse of the human rights discourse by right-wing groups makes their militant political positions evident. These groups are more likely to confront state institutions, are more prone to break laws, are hostile towards the state, and position themselves as “anti-establishment” and “opposition.” Along with all this, these groups use the language of “human rights violations” to interpret the actions of the state and the law enforcement system against far-right activists. Despite the fact that right-wing activists claim that the state has always treated them unfairly making qualifications in the language of human rights violations is a new and transformed rhetoric.

The rhetoric of human rights is a reliable way to claim that a person, a citizen is a victim of the state. Social movements often create a victim image as part of building their identity in order to attract public attention and mobilize and involve more people in their movement. Conservative, far-right groups also use victimization to lend themselves public legitimacy. For example, when talking about “Black lives matter,” right-wing groups say: “All lives matter.” This practice is very common in Armenia as well. When women’s rights organizations and initiatives speak out about violations of women’s rights, right-wing groups bring forth the narrative of “rights of all,” when they speak about the rights of sexual and gender minorities, they formulate the idea of protecting “the rights of the majority.”

The link between the protection of human rights, being a victim of human rights violations, and one’s own vulnerability is very strong. People whose rights have been violated, who have been subjected to discrimination and violence based on their identity, views, positions, and other features, usually establish organizations, grassroots initiatives, or movements to fight for the protection of their violated rights and the elimination of discrimination. On the other hand, however, the “politicization of vulnerability” implies a the political claims-making process in which purported victimhood is used by movements to produce legitimacy and moral authority. [64]

The use of victimization practices like intrusion and mimicry is widespread in the Armenian political context. Thus, especially after the Revolution, criminal cases were initiated against the representatives of the former regime and some politicians related to them, the latter were involved in various legal cases as witnesses or received another status. In this context, they present the already initiated criminal cases as political persecution, and present themselves as “victims of the regime.” For instance, in June 2020, the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Armenia submitted a motion to the National Assembly to obtain the permission of the MPs to detain MP, oligarch Gagik Tsarukyan. Tsarukyan was charged with organizing election bribery during the Parliamentary elections in 2017 but did not admit the charge and considered that he was being politically persecuted for demanding the resignation of the Government.[65] Other deputies of the Prosperous Armenia party, with the joint efforts of their party members and employees of business organizations affiliated with them, organized protests in front of the RA National Security Service building demanding the release of Gagik Tsarukyan.

“You saw how, as a matter of fact, violence was used against the deputy of the National Assembly. This is legal and political lawlessness. If they think that they can silence us by scaring and arresting us, they are profoundly mistaken. We are all Gagik Tsarukyan and we will stay here. We will not allow people who came to power with democratic slogans to violate democracy with police and KGB forces. The two statements of the NSS are legal futurism… I am ready for any scenario, they may arrest me too but this is the beginning of the end of this Government.” [66]

As a matter of fact, the criminal, oligarch, and anti-democratic segment of the deputies of RA NA who have great protection, immunity, and many other safeguards, declare themselves as victims and use the language of human rights and democracy for the protection of their narrow political and party interests. Furthermore, female MPs engaged in street activism interpret police actions against them as violence against women and a violation of women’s rights, present themselves as “real” victims, meanwhile it is due to their political, economic, media, and other activities that the rights of working people,[67] LGBT people,[68] people with other religious views,[69] women[70], etc. are being violated.

Thus, in this article, we have addressed the abuse of the concept and language of human rights by right-wing and far-right groups – the “newcomers,” while their activities mostly contradict the fundamental principles of human rights which are the universality, inalienability, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelatedness, equality and non-discrimination, inclusiveness and the rule of law.

Using the methods of entryism, copying, and mimicry, as well as victimhood work, “newcomers” enter various systems and networks to make changes “from the inside” aggressively trying to put pressure on law enforcement and lawmaking bodies to include laws and practices that limit rights, target vulnerable groups from a human rights perspective while presenting themselves as a vulnerable group.

At this stage, it will be difficult to say how the public perceives this dangerous phenomenon. On the one hand, human rights activists have constantly criticized the complicated nature of the human rights “jargon” in terms of reaching the wider public, while on the other hand, these groups of “newcomers” towards whom there is or has been public aversion, presently use the same language. Therefore, it is very difficult to assess what kind of social and political effects the use of human rights language and jargon will have in the future especially when these campaigns and initiatives are dynamically developing both across the world and in Armenia.

Although some social scientists claim that right-wing and far-right groups appearing in the domain of human rights and acting from a human rights position, on the one hand, is a step towards the recognition of the universality of human rights, it also reduces, for instance, armed rebellions and civil wars, but on the other hand, another part of studies on these issues has already noted how various right-wing groups form coalitions on certain issues with the center-left human rights activists forming “cooperative hostile coalitions.”[71]

It is already widespread that opposing social movements unite and form coalitions on certain issues. Examples of such partnerships include the collaboration of disability and anti-abortion activists on anti-abortion projects, the collaboration of evangelicals and progressive environmental activists against the abolition of the death sentence, the joint struggle of nationalist industrialists and leftists against globalization, and so on. For some groups, these coalitions end when they succeed in achieving their goals, such as anti-pornography feminists and conservatives working together to eliminate pornography.[72]

Author Nvard Margaryan

Supported by Women’s Fund Armenia in the framework of the project “On the Right Track: Establishing a European-Latin American Alliance of Women’s Funds to defend human rights and the values of democracy, freedom and diversity from the attack of the rising religious conservatism and the right-wing” implementing by the collective of women’s funds in Europe and Latin America.
Supported by WECF-Germany in the framework of the project “Her Portrayal, Her Rights – Ethical Media in the Caucasus”.

[1] Mutua, M. W. (2015, October 3). Is the age of human rights over?  Routledge Companion to Literature and Human Rights, ed. Sophia A. McClennen and Alexandra Schultheis Moore (London and New York: Routledge, 2016), pp. 450-458, Retrieved from SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2668287 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2668287.

[2] Bob, C. (2015). The Endtimes of Human Rights, Stephen Hopgood (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 2013), 255 pp., Ethics & International Affairs, 29(1), 114–116. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1017/s0892679414000811.

[3] Mutua, M. W. (2015, October 3). Is the age of human rights over?  Routledge Companion to Literature and Human Rights, ed. Sophia A. McClennen and Alexandra Schultheis Moore (London and New York: Routledge, 2016), pp. 450-458, Retrieved from SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2668287 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2668287.

[4] Dudai, R. (2017). Entryism, mimicry and victimhood work: the adoption of human rights discourse by right-wing groups in Israel, The International Journal of Human Rights, 21:7, 866-888, DOI: 10.1080/13642987.2017.1313235.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Khalatyan, M., Manusyan, A., Margaryan, N. (2020). The Activity, Rhetoric, and Goals of Anti-Gender Campaigns in the Post-Revolutionary Armenia (A. Zhamkochyan, ed.). Socioscope.

[7] Idib.

[8] Dudai, R. (2017). Entryism, mimicry and victimhood work: the adoption of human rights discourse by right-wing groups in Israel, The International Journal of Human Rights, 21:7, 866-888, DOI: 10.1080/13642987.2017.1313235.

[9] In February 2018, the Ministry of Justice presented a bill that provided for the legal regulation of the application of fines to lawyers and prosecutors by the court according to which a sanction of up to AMD 100,000 can also be applied to lawyers and prosecutors. hetq.am (2018, February). Lawyers will carry out an act of protest. Retrieved from: https://hetq.am/hy/article/85533։

On February 1, 2018, the present Government approved the draft Law on the Structure and Operation of the Government which provided that the meetings of the Government would be mostly closed, and some parts might be open to journalists only by the decision of the Prime Minister. azatutyun.am (February, 2018). The new draft law proposes to make the Government sessions closed. Retrieved from: https://www .azatutyun.am/a/29011602.html:

[10] arlis.am. (2017, February). RA Law on Non-Governmental Organizations. Retrieved from: https://www.arlis.am/documentview.aspx?docid=110802 ։

[11] Andreasyan, Zh., Zhamkochyan, A., Ishkhanyan, A., Manusyan, A., Manusyan, S.  (2018). From the Shrinking Space to the Post-revolutionary Space: Re-imagining the Role and Relations of Civil Society in Armenia. Yerevan. Socioscope NGO.

[12] gov.am. (2014, April). The RA Prime Minister and the US Ambassador reaffirmed their willingness to continue cooperation. Retrieved from https://www.gov.am/am/news/item/11242/

[13] parliament.am. (2009, April). Hovik Abrahamyan: “The OSCE Yerevan Office and Other Executive Structures Should Continue to Follow Closely and Respond to the Needs of the Armenian Authorities and Civil Society.” Retrieved from http://parliament.am/chairman.php?page=meetings&NewsID=3285&year=2009&month=00

[14] transparency.am. (2013, February). Issues of public concern in the programs of the presidential candidates. Retrieved from https://transparency.am/hy/media/news/article/850

[15] hetq.am. (2017, April). Who Observed the Elections? Samvel Aleksanyan’s Brother-in-law an Observer? Retrieved from https://hetq.am/hy/article/77640

[16] 1in.am. (2012, May). The Choice is Yours NGO is Satisfied with the Quality of the Elections held on May 6. Retrieved from https://www.1in.am/80377.html

[17] celog.am. (2016, September). The Head of the Government Received the Representatives of a Number of NGOs.  Retrieved from https://celog.am/hy/2/News/NewsDetail?newsId=260

[18] moj.am. (2013, March). The second stage of the public debate on the draft of “Action Plan Arising from the National Strategy for the Protection of Human Rights.”  Retrieved from https://www.moj.am/article/679

[19] Prime Minister’s decrees. (2017, February). On encouragement by the RA Prime Minister with a commemorative medal and a letter of appreciation. Retrieved from https://www.e-gov.am/decrees/item/16817/

[20] UN Human Rights Council. (2014, October). National report submitted in accordance with paragraph 5 of the annex to Human Rights Council resolution 16/21*Armenia. Retrieved from https://www.upr-info.org/sites/default/files/documents/2014-12/a_hrc_wg.6_21_arm_1_e.pdf

[21] 1in.am. (2014, October). “If the number of NGOs has increased dramatically, the processes are open and transparent,” Vardan Aramyan on grants. Retrieved from https://www.1in.am/1467733.html։

[22] Ibid.

[23] azatutyun.am. (2013, April). The Organizations Receiving Grants from the President’s Office are not Found. Retrieved from https://www.azatutyun.am/a/24972052.html

[24] Civilnet. (2013, December). From your Pocket to the Attempts of Not Smoking. Retrieved from  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDUAZOwvuyM

[25] hetq.am. (2018, June). The proceeding on the plunder from EU grant projects was launched. Retrieved from https://hetq.am/hy/article/90562

[26] armlur.am. (2018, September). RPA members are bringing a goon squad on Armenia. What is expected? Retrieved from   https://armlur.am/838838/

[27] iravaban.net. (2019, February). What activities will the newly established NGOs of Arpine Hovhannisyan and Ruben Melikyan engage in? Retrieved from  https://iravaban.net/214949.html

[28] armenpress.am. (2021, July). Naira Zohrabyan founded a human rights NGO. Retrieved from  https://armenpress.am/arm/news/1058982.html

[29] aravot.am. (2019, September). Arpine Hovhannisyan: “Daniel Ioannisyan devoted one minute of his 2.5-minute speech to me, accusing me of all the possible flaws of the judicial system of Armenia.” Retrieved from https://www.aravot.am/2019/09/23/1067788/

[30] Sahakyan, S. (2019, December). Human Rights in Armenia. Retrieved from  https://www.upr-info.org/sites/default/files/documents/2019-12/2._path_of_law_ngo_ppt.pdf

[31] VETO. (2021, April). Anna Hakobyan, a member of the VETO movement, sums up on ArmNews the act of protest that took place on April 7. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mCe4_44TD8&t=502s

[32] Nikoghosyan A. (2015). Levers of change: combined actions of activists engaged in the protection of women’s rights in Armenia. Are anti-gender movements on the rise? Antares. (Heinrich Böhl Foundation: a series of publications devoted to democracy). p. 34-43.

[33] aravot.am. (2019, June). The response of the MP of the “My Step” faction when the member of VETO described Soros office as a “state-destructing.” Retrieved from https://www.aravot.am/2019/06/26/1052422/

[34] livenews.am. (2019, October). Marina Khachatryan laid eggs on the Deputy Head of Police’s table (video). Retrieved from  https://livenews.am/press/2019/23500/22/19/12/

[35] Armenian Revolutionary Federation. (2019, June). The anti-flat tax movement organizes professional debates in different cities. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/3POaG2d

[36] shabat.am. (2020, August). Malyan, go away, before we do you “ashotyan,” (mean: make you leave) Amulsar activists to Narek Malyan  (video). Retrieved from https://shabat.am/am/article/232074/Malyan–heraci%D5%9Br–qani-ashotyan-chenq

[37] Soros Daredevils is a pun that associates George Soros with the epic “Daredevils of Sassoun.” Basically, this phrase refers to the representatives of the “Daredevils of Sassoun” Pan-Armenian party who present themselves as a pro-European political force.

[38] news.am. (2019, September). Soros’ daredevils, pretending to be environmentalists, tried to take over the voicing of the Amulsar issue. Narek Malyan. Retrieved from https://news.am/arm/news/532006.html

[39] 1in TV. (2017, October). Violence during the debate on the Law on Domestic Violence. The Minister is the centerpiece.. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX5VQhUds6w&t=251s

[40] azatutyun.am. (2017, October). The public debate on the domestic violence bill took place in a heated atmosphere. Retrieved from https://www.azatutyun.am/a/28782881.html

[41] Khalatyan, M., Manusyan, A., Margaryan, N. (2020). The Activity, Rhetoric, and Goals of Anti-Gender Campaigns in the Post-Revolutionary Armenia (A. Zhamkochyan, ed.). Socioscope.

[42] Dudai, R. (2017). Entryism, mimicry and victimhood work: the adoption of human rights discourse by right-wing groups in Israel, The International Journal of Human Rights, 21:7, 866-888, DOI: 10.1080/13642987.2017.1313235.

[43] Peeples, J. (2005). Aggressive Mimicry: The Rhetoric of Wise Use and the Environmental Movement, The Environmental Communication Yearbook 2 (2005)1.

[44] azatutyun.am. (2022, June). The opposition will announce today how it will continue the struggle. Retrieved from https://www.azatutyun.am/a/31897652.html

[45] The wave of protest was generated by the representatives of the opposition based on this part of Pashinyan’s speech, “Today the international community tells us again: lower your bar a little on the status of Nagorno Karabakh and you will ensure a great international consolidation around Armenia and Artsakh.”

primeminister.am. (2022, April). Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s speech at the 2021 annual performance report discussion of the Government Program in the National Assembly.  Retrieved from https://www.primeminister.am/hy/statements-and-messages/item/2022/04/13/Nikol-Pashinyan-Speech/

[46] armtimes.com. (2022, April). Between the Velvet Revolution and the “velvet” revanche. Retrieved from https://www.armtimes.com/hy/article/236149

[47] armeniasputnik.am. (2022). Resistance movement. Retrieved from https://armeniasputnik.am/common_dimadrutjun-sharzhum/

[48] 365 Daily. (2022, May). Unsuccessful revolutionaries: the opposition is copying Pashinyan’s Revolution. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdtIWS2_oJU

[49] change.org. (2020, June). Community Guidelines. Retrieved from https://www.change.org/policies/community

[50] Infocom.am. (2019, July). Istanbul rages in Yerevan. Violence as a family value |forrights.am|. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/3OwMAYM

[51] armenpress.am (2021, April). A new political party joined Armenia’s political field. Retrieved from https://armenpress.am/arm/news/1050820.html

[52] Zartonk National Christian Party. About us. Retrieved from https://www.zartonq.am/#about

[53] Ibid.

[54] World March of Women. Goals of The World March of Women. Retrieved from https://marchemondiale.org/index.php/who-we-are/goals-of-the-world-march-of-women/

[55] October 1st has been declared the National Day Against Domestic Violence by the Coalition to Stop Violence Against Women.

[56] 16 days of activism against gender-based violence includes the following memorable days: November 25 – International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women; December 1 – World AIDS days; December 2 – International Day for the Abolition of Slavery; December 3 – International Day of Disabled Persons; December 6 –Montreal Massacre Rememberance Day;  December 10 – International Human Rights Day.

[57] VETO. (2021, April). Anna Hakobyan, a member of the VETO movement, sums up on ArmNews the act of protest that took place on April 7. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mCe4_44TD8&t=502s

[58] panorama.am. (2021, November). Where are the NGOs that were screaming for many years, but have been silent for 3 years now? Astghik Matevosyan. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/3BaCMQW

[59] Ibid.

[60] VETO. (2021, April). Anna Hakobyan, a member of the VETO movement, sums up on ArmNews the act of protest that took place on April 7. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mCe4_44TD8&t=502s

[61] Socioscope NGO. (2021). Conspiracy theories and anti-gender campaigns in the context of the coronavirus. Online discussion. Archive of Socioscope NGO.

[62] hetq.am. (2022, May). In response to the peace agenda: the statement of Jaragayt. Retrieved from https://hetq.am/hy/article/144538

[63] Olivius, E., Hedström, J. (2019). Militarized nationalism as a platform for feminist mobilization? The case of the exiled Burmese women’s movement. Women’s Studies International Forum, 76, 102263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2019.102263.

[64] Dudai, R. (2017). Entryism, mimicry and victimhood work: the adoption of human rights discourse by right-wing groups in Israel, The International Journal of Human Rights, 21:7, 866-888, DOI: 10.1080/13642987.2017.1313235.

[65] azatutyun.am. (2020, October). Gagik Tsarukyan was released from the “Yerevan-center” penitentiary institution. Retrieved from https://www.azatutyun.am/a/30907437.html

[66] 1in TV. (2020, June). We will stay here because we are all Gagik Tsarukyan. Naira Zohrabyan. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvllSnTzjKk

[67] infocom.am. (2019, April). “Araratcement” employees are on strike: they have blocked the road to the plant and want to meet Tsarukyan |news.am|. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/3cvTxeZ

[68] pinkarmenia.org. (2018, March). The deputy proposes to isolate LGBT persons. Retrieved from https://www.pinkarmenia.org/news/mp-hatespeech/

[69] pinkarmenia.org. (2018, December). Cursing LGBTI persons does not bring votes. Retrieved from https://www.pinkarmenia.org/news/na-campaign/

[70] azatutyun.am. (2020, September). According to the doctor, in the event of an abortion ban, illegal activities will gain momentum. Retrieved from https://www.azatutyun.am/a/30831988.html

[71] Whittier, N. (2014, November 4). Rethinking Coalitions: Anti-Pornography Feminists, Conservatives, and Relationships between Collaborative Adversarial Movements․ Social Problems, 61 (2), 175–193. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2014.12151.

[72] Ibid.

Funded by

The post Why is the Human Rights Agenda So Attractive to Right-Wing Groups? appeared first on Socioscope.

The article is about the peculiarity of the “Women for Peace” campaign initiated by the RA Prime Minister’s wife, Anna Hakobyan, and the reopened talks on peace in the public domain, combined with the stories of peace-building efforts of female figures of different periods of the Armenian reality. The work on the article started parallel to the launch of the campaign. Selection of the topic, the guidelines of the study, and the co-authored editorial work of the text wording was carried out by Anna Zhamakochyan, alongside the author Mariam Khalatyan. The work was almost ready when the campaign, which was aimed at supporting the overcoming of the Karabakh conflict, faced the calamity from which it had originated, the actual warfare. The renewed war delayed the publication of the article rendering its publishing anachronistic in that context. However, both the transformation of Anna Hakobyan’s activities during the war, the freezing of the campaign after the war, as well as the ongoing debates on the role of women in establishing peace became the basis for retrospectively reflecting on the campaign and publishing it revised. In this phase, the editing of the article was carried out by Arpy Manusyan. Thus, we present the article with revised editions (indicating which vulnerabilities of the campaign did not allow to preserve its pacifist core) and added sections (including considerations about transformations of the campaign in the war and post-war periods).

Being Heard

“At that time they did not hear us, the war continued, and the number of victims, prisoners of war, and hostages increased”^[1] – these are the words of Arzu Abdullayeva describing the situation in the 1990s, during the Nagorno Karabakh conflict when she and her colleague from Armenia, Anahit Bayandur, began to care about the fates of people captured as a result of the war. At that time, as well as before and after that, the voice of these women (and in general, women who convey a message on peace) was not heard. Regardless, with the help of their supporters and joint efforts, these two women contributed to the release about 500 people from captivity from the Azerbaijani and Armenian sides in the years of the First Karabakh War. This step received attention and an award, not at all local or regional.^[2]

From those years up to the present, Arzu Abdullayeva has been the Chair of the Azerbaijani National Committee of the Helsinki Citizens Assembly, and Anahit Bayandur, the co-chair of the homonymous organization in Armenia, was a deputy of the ruling power, the PANM (Pan-Armenian National Movement) faction, in the Supreme Council (Parliament) of the country. The posts held and the efforts made by these women sufficed to make a positive breakthrough in the lives of around 500 people. But only 500.

Arzu Abdullayeva and Anahit Bayandur, like many active women of the time, were convinced that the conflict would not end with the war. Even now, after the Second Karabakh War, it is obvious that the conflict did not end with the war: people want peace (no matter how different the perceptions of peace may be).

Usually (and ordinary) women do not make the decision to wage or not wage a war. They appear in the target of war, that is, in a predetermined “privileged” role, be it a consecrated object, an auxiliary servicing body, or booty seized from the enemy. Women go through the harsh course of wars, bear their consequences, and become targets of attack and defense. Women experience the privations faced by themselves, their children, and the elderly under their care, the multiple burdens of hardships faced by military and civilian men. Women become the parent of the future soldier, the mother of the (fallen) soldier, the wife and supporter of the military man, the victim of sexual abuse, the caring nurse, the support in the back and the housekeeper, the encourager, the comforter, the mother of the future soldier to be born, and sometimes, the hero fighting side by side with the man who, however, will be mostly neglected in the post-war period. Women are responsible for everyone during wars: they stand out for their resilience in crises and the ability to make quick decisions, although these decisions often do not include the wishes of these women themselves (to stay in the war zone or to leave). They are guided by the “orders” of their husbands, and they adapt to the demands of their children, setting aside their own wishes and needs.[3]

According to Cynthia Enloe, “Militaries need women-but they need women to behave as the gender ‘women’. This always requires the exercise of control… This is what is so strikingly revealed in the experiences of women who have been used as the military’s prostitutes, rape victims, wives, widows, social workers, nurses, soldiers, defense workers, and mothers” (Enloe, 2018).

In war situations and in general, as a consequence of the militancy propaganda, the “enemy” on both opposing sides is perceived as “unmanly” – demasculinized, and women are labeled as “mothers of the nation” tasked with producing new generations, giving birth to soldiers and taking care of everyone, of the country while men are at war. In many cases, it is precisely these women who are forgotten after the war.[4]

The Second Karabakh War reinforced the roles assigned to women: thousands of women lost their husbands, sons, and brothers, and appeared in the target of political and public speculation, regularly hearing how to “correctly” mourn a personal tragedy.

Many of these predefined roles were previously largely unavailable to women (e.g, soldier, military nurse) and even a century or a one-and-a-half century ago, aspiring to them in the pursuit of gender equality was considered a progressive step. Some female figures fighting for the advancement of women in public life encouraged their peers to assume statuses that granted a certain active role, albeit militarized, seeing in them the liberation of women from the four walls of a closed domestic, overwhelming, silent life or the confined consumer environment of purely bourgeois life.

At the beginning of the 20th century, one of the Armenian female figures who advocated such a role of women in the war was, for instance, Constantinople-based Armenian public speaker, and educator Mari Beilerian (1877-1915).^[5] In the section “The Impact of Women: War and Women” of her work “Depi Ver” (Upward) (1914) she addresses these issues calling on women to recognize and find their special role in times of war (Beilerian, 1914). Throughout her educational, journalistic, and editorial activities, Mari Beilerian tried to create occasions and opportunities for women to be heard in order to increase the participation of women both in the arrangement of family and public life.

In the critique of war, Mari Beilerian attaches importance to the right of people to freedom and self-defense. She strongly condemns war and considers women to be the ones who suffer the most from it. As per her interpretation, the only reason for wars in the world is that the state domineers over people’s rights and fails to establish justice among the population. Beilerian is very clear on this issue: the task of the state is to ensure the welfare of its citizens, and the establishment of justice among them so that people do not exert violence against others and there is no war. Since the state does not do this peacefully, the citizens are left with no other choice but to fight for their rights and justice. Mari Beilerian believes that states seeking power and authority should abandon their ambitions to rule the world and focus on creating conditions for people’s happy and prosperous life.[6] She does not romanticize the idea of ​​peace. It is very clear: peace should be fought for.[7] In times of war, as for Mari Beilerian, women should serve the agenda of the war. She sees the unique role of women in “convincing” men. Beilerian highlights women’s capacity of “irresistible influence” on decision- makers, on men, its motivating power, values ​​“fighting as bravely as men,” “the heroic spirit” with which they fought side by side with men in the past:

“The beautiful young Alanian woman, Satenik, managed to persuade proud Artashes to release her brother from captivity by the influence of her sweet word (…). And the women were aware of that profound and irresistible influence of theirs since they inspirited and encouraged their husbands, brothers, and children during the war. (…) And in South America, on the bounds of the Amazon, there were women who knew how to fight as courageously as men, and who were called Amazons, after an old mythical name. The history of the most ancient centuries and even the present day gives us undeniable proof of the heroic spirit of women. It was not in the remote past when Anita, the wife of the prominent Italian, patriot Garibaldi, lived fighting side by side with her husband, sharing the thousands of dangers hanging over his head. She was the angel of consolation of those dying in the war, she remedied the wounded with the caress of a sister, she reached out to everyone and everywhere, and eventually she herself died of fatigue and privation” (Beilerian, 1914).

Not only Mari Beilerian’s words but also her very life bore the stamp of the war and the internal violence unleashed during and as a consequence of it: she was among the Armenian intellectuals who fell victim to the Genocide. Perhaps, unlike male intellectuals, Mari Beilerian also fell victim to oblivion remaining undiscovered in the established Armenian culture.

Another Armenian female figure, writer Zabel Yesayan (1878-1943), defined the role of women differently in the same period and in relation to the same context (at the same time, being familiar with the French reality through her experience). In 1911, she published a series of articles in the Aragats journal, released in New York, on the woman question, the public role of women, including the role of women in matters of peace. In the article “Woman for Peace,” Zabel Yesayan, addressing particularly the role of women in France, writes that women are pacifists by nature, and she has chosen the path of spreading peace to the generations through the role of an educating wife and mother. Zabel Yesayan writes that women, as mothers and sisters, are against fights and war by their nature, and women are not carried away by the glory of power like men, violence is incompatible with women’s nature and temperament (Yesayan, 1911). Like Mari Beilerian, Zabel Yesayan also believed that if women engage in military operations, it is for self-defense.

Another female figure related to the Armenian context, Lucy Thoumaian (1890-1940), underscored the struggle for peace in women’s activities. She was Swiss by origin and, before emigrating to England during the Armenian massacres with her Armenian husband, Karapet Thoumaian, she lived and worked in the Ottoman Empire. Thoumaian was a part of the international movement founded by female figures who considered the issue of peace as one of the important roles of women since the mid of the 19th century. Lucy Tumayan’s appeal, “A Manifesto to Women of Every Land,” appeared in the official journal of Jus Suffragii (the Right of Suffrage) of the International Woman Suffrage Alliance in 1914 (in the days of the already started First World War). She proposed to organize weekly meetings of women, which should proceed until a secure peace was established: “War is man-made, it must be woman undone” (Liddington, 1989, 91). Lucy Thoumaian suggested that meetings begin with prayer, continue with exhortations to God and governments to discontinue the intolerable evil and sin, and lean on arbitration: “We will do it as mothers of mankind, as sisters of the whole human race” (Liddington, 1989, 91). In 1915, Lucy Thoumaian addressed this call to the Women at the Hague conference representing Armenia there.

“Dear Sisters of Every Land. – Whilst our respective     soldiers go bravely to the front, and whilst we at home do what we can for the wounded and the distressed, there is something else still more important to do, of which no one seems to think and     which is very specially suited also to the soothing and loving influence          of woman. It is the preventing our beloved soldiers to become wounded! It is        to work, and this internationally, in the interest of the future peace of Europe.

(Moynagh, Forestell eds. (2012).

More than a century ago, in the days of universal calamity, these women tried to be heard and, importantly, to form a discourse on women’s role and actions, with a secondary role of influencing male decision-makers in winning the war on one hand, and ritual activities promoting the spread of peace through simply bringing women together, on the other. Despite this difference, both approaches are characteristic ideas of the first-wave feminist figures about women, whose role remains within the limits of reforming the male society. This approach will later be criticized, rejected, sometimes supplemented, and sometimes even reproduced by feminists and female figures of another generation.

In modern Armenia also, women think and talk about the (romanticized) role of women in war, the involvement of women in the army or, on the contrary, the rejection of war, the change of the military system, and the fight for peace, especially due to the Karabakh conflict erupted in the 1990s.

Some of them (especially during war escalations) tried to unite, raise their voices, and define their own actions to transform the historical and political questions facing them, their societies, and countries, mainly acting within the framework of self-organized civil initiatives and non-governmental organizations.

It was much rarer, however, that the issue of overcoming the war became an agenda for female figures representing or related to the ruling elite. In the pursuit of this, women advocates for peace were constantly at risk of being marginalized, facing ridicule and hostile attitude, being labeled as traitors, and physically attacked: both in the 1990s, and especially after the political turn that followed the years of war (1998) when the militant ideology began to spread as the dominant truth, and in present, after the Second Karabakh War. While female figures of Azerbaijan and Armenia could still make mutual visits in the days of the intense war in 1992 since the mid-2000s mutual visits have become almost impossible and take place in a third country.  This is also suggested by Arzu Abdullayeva’s letter of condolence upon Anahit Bayandur’s passing in 2011, in which she tells about Anahit Bayandur’s visit to Baku in 1992, without already having the opportunity to personally come to Yerevan:

“Our first joint action was paying mutual visits in the days of the intense war: Anahit visited Baku, and I visited Yerevan. I remember how in August 1992, upon arrival in Baku at my invitation, she began her speech in front of an Azerbaijani audience. She said in a calm voice, “I have come to say hello to you.” Then she explained that she had come to prove that our peoples were not enemies, they could not be, and that we had a lot in common. The audience was listening to her. Some listened with respect and admiration, others tried to find flaws in her speech to cling to in order to attack her. But her calm and simple “Hello” left no chance.” ^[8]

Since the mid-2000s, the dominance of automatically increasing militancy established by the elites of Azerbaijan and Armenia has distanced the two societies from each other and normalized mutual demonization or dehumanization. The semi-war situation lasting decades, the Second Karabakh War of 2020 increased the loss of lives renewing the wounds. The situation that has lasted for years has alienated people in Armenia and Azerbaijan from their vital problem and its resolution, from the acknowledgment of being a part of building peace. After the Second Karabakh War, it became more urgent, however, concurrently more complicated to enable the conversation about overcoming the hostility and the possibility of peace between the parties. Today, talking about the demand for peace requires extraordinary courage which the brave people of Armenia, including women, continue to do.

“Women for Peace”- Before the War

The activities aimed at peace and the involvement of women in it were more or less massively launched with the “Women for Peace” campaign initiated by Anna Hakobyan, the wife of the Prime Minister who formed the government after the 2018 Velvet Revolution.

The turn that took place in the domestic political life of Armenia in 2018 presented opportunities to renounce not only the corrupt elite but also the ideologies fueled by it. In this sense, the declaration of the Prime Minister’s wife about initiating the “Women for Peace” campaign in that political context of Armenia was a groundbreaking and brave step. Not only was this an initiative to shift the discursive course of the settlement of the Karabakh conflict and to direct it towards the establishment of peace, but also to pronouncedly introduce women’s perspective. And what was very peculiar is that this discourse was led from a near-official platform. The campaign was interesting in two respects: firstly, in terms of direct contact with public officials in post-revolutionary Armenia, and secondly, in terms of questioning the established formulations and practices related to women and war issues by a woman.

This did not at all mean that the militarization processes slowed down in Armenia, or that the discourse of militancy was no longer in place, but it should be highlighted that a new stream of pro-peace discourse was formed at the state level, by the Prime Minister, the Foreign Minister, and some members of the National Assembly. It was from this perspective that the promotion of the peacebuilding discourse by the Prime Minister’s wife was significant. In addition, the revolution also enabled the increasing and highlighting of the role of women which created the opportunity and conditions for the implementation of this campaign.

The campaign was launched during a meeting held in Moscow’s Tretyakov Gallery in July 2018. Anna Hakobyan introduced the participants to the “Women for Peace” campaign initiated by her, the aim of which was to prevent new casualties in Armenia and Azerbaijan through women’s calls for peace.[9] The message of the “Women for Peace” campaign became known not only within the country but also became a subject of discussion on various international platforms, during conferences, and meetings of the Prime Minister’s wife with politicians (ambassadors, representatives of various organizations, congressmen).

Initially, the activity was mostly outside Armenia: in the USA, Kazakhstan, Germany, and China among others. There was also a meeting in Karabakh, on the frontline, with the participation of various Armenian and Russian female figures.^[10] Thus, by using international platforms, the movement gained the opportunity to make the intention and readiness for a peaceful settlement of the conflict widely known and accessible. Anna Hakobyan always noted in her speech that she called on all mothers, and it was her desire that this appeal became global, and was heard on international platforms.

“With all this in mind, I have initiated the “Women for Peace” campaign which aims to unite women from all parties of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict to reject war and join their efforts to save human lives from all parties of the conflict. Our ultimate goal is to create a global network of women for the establishment of peace in Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as in other hotspots around the world.”^[11]

With the internationalization of the campaign, on the one hand, the role of the local context of the Karabakh conflict was decreasing, but on the other hand, with the statements about becoming international, the idea of ​​peace and the imperative to settle the Karabakh conflict peacefully were placed in a global context.

There have been successful instances of international campaign initiatives on a regional conflict, such as the “African First Ladies Peace Mission” campaign founded back in 1995,^[12] and women’s peacebuilding activities in Liberia since 2002.^[13] Therefore, no matter how unique the initiative of this campaign was in our reality, it could claim important results.

The internationalization of the campaign, however, was not accompanied by regional expansion: the engagement of the most important party, the Azerbaijani women, did not take place. The sensitivity of the topic should be taken into account in the conditions of the parallelly unfolding militarization policy which complicated the dialogue or the implementation of other substantive, moreover, radical steps. In particular, parallel to the course of the campaign, the developments in the political field led to the 2020 July clashes on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border. In response to this event, Anna Hakobyan appealed to Azerbaijani women and mothers to stop hostilities and pursue peace pointing out that there is always an alternative to war.^[14]

The reaction of the Azerbaijani side to the remote dialogue attempt acquired problematic manifestations. Virtually, the discourse of waging a conflict permeated the peace campaign from its start:

“On the other side of the border, they are concerned that the visit of honorable Russian ladies to the Karabagh-Azerbaijani border from the Armenian side means supporting the position of the Armenian side. I would like to highlight once again that the “Women for Peace” campaign does not aim to enter the realm of substantive regulation. It aims to exclusively protect the young lives of both Armenians and Azerbaijanis. And in order to avoid any misunderstanding on this account, I suggest that you also visit the opposite side of the contact line and send the same message from there as well.” ^[15]

Nonetheless, what was the message of the “Women for Peace” campaign that was supposed to unite the women of the region: Armenia, Karabakh, Azerbaijan, Russia, and even other countries? The two essential components that made up the core of the campaign were the interpretation of the phenomenon of peace and the formulations of women’s participation and role.

In the scope of the campaign, peace was interpreted as:

• At the basic level, a “natural” and understandable phenomenon, a human and ordinary situation. Nevertheless, to hold on to and talk about the fact that peace is self-evident in a state of war requires a special effort. Addressing the horrors of war that are known to mankind, Anna Hakobyan emphasizes the “less” attention given to peace in a “non-war” state.^[16]
• The next layer is the ideological interpretation of peace. This is a reference to people acknowledging peace, having an idea of it in their minds. Highlighting the need for legal documents and agreements on peace, Anna Hakobyan considers the “acknowledgment of peace in people’s minds and hearts” to be overriding, and only sees the complementarity of these two as a possible path to peace. ^[17]
• At the third level of peace discourse, the question of goal and result is formulated: what does peace give? Peace is a state ensuring progress and development for which people need to make an effort. In the state of war and loss, everyone’s effort counts in terms of achieving peace as a daily work. Adding to the previous interpretations and summarizing the ideas about peace, Anna Hakobyan considers the actual result of peace to be critical in the discourse of the campaign, the possibility of translating what is written on paper into reality, the peace that ensures conditions for development and prosperity.^[18]

Addressing the other key issue of the campaign, the interpretation of women’s role and participation, it is noted that they derive mainly from women’s family statuses (mother, wife, sister) and do not outline the whole range of public roles. Thus, in the context of the campaign, the following roles of women were circulated:

• Women as mothers in solidarity with other mothers. The circumstance of women being mothers is discussed here, regardless of nationality and other features. For a woman, in this case for a mother, the nationality of a soldier killed in the conflict doesn’t matter. Based on the claims about the influence of women on decision-makers, Anna Hakobyan called on women to unite and not allow their children to be killed, regardless of their nationality.^[19]
• Women as grieving mothers. The campaign was aimed at promoting the idea that there are no more grieving mothers due to the establishment of peace. Listing the effects of wars – the obliteration of young soldiers’ lives, the orphaning of many families, and the continuous increase of mothers in black in both countries, Anna Hakobyan addresses her appeal and questions to the women themselves: who but women and mothers endure the eternal grief of the loss of their children? Who but women and mothers should raise their voices for peace? Who but women and mothers can influence decision-makers? ^[20]
• Women, as assistants in the spread of peace and “the one who gladly cedes the hard task of settlement to men.” With this formulation, women’s role in the process of spreading and establishing peace is limited to having an influence on the decision-makers and gladly ceding the hard task aimed at the origin of the conflict and its resolution to men, urging men to spare the lives of Armenian and Azerbaijani young men.^[21]

A Peace Campaign without Criticizing the Army and Politics

While attaching importance to Anna Hakobyan’s meetings and discussions with the parents of soldiers killed in the army (those killed in the April 2016 escalation, with parents of soldiers killed in peaceful conditions), mothers and wives of soldiers killed in the Second Karabakh War, it should be noted that this campaign circumvented the constant and systemic problems of the army murders, suicides, tortures, discrimination, which are fatal even after the Second Karabakh War.

Within the scope of the “Women for Peace” campaign, the correlations between the question of peace and the problems of the army were not formulated despite Anna Hakobyan’s visits to the border military units and her attention to the army[22], or, perhaps, due to that attention. From the perspective of leading the peace campaign, Anna Hakobyan’s military uniform during her visits to the army was a sign of fondness of army. The clothing brought forth an additional semantic weight of militancy, the synthesis of which with peacebuilding efforts gave rise to questions. In addition, parallel to the importance of women’s role in calls for peace, Anna Hakobyan’s steps were aimed at women’s engagement in the military.

 “…All developed countries have long tasked themselves with increasing the number of women in their defense systems as studies have shown that the armed forces where women have a greater presence are much more effective. In addition, according to international studies, the world will be more peaceful and safer if women have a more serious and profound role in defense and security issues and, even more so, in the processes of conflict resolution and peace establishment.” ^[23]

This approach did not take into account that advocating for the involvement of women in the military further expands the scope of militarization. Moreover, during a meeting with active women in Karabakh in May 2020, Anna Hakobyan spoke about the required involvement of women during a military attack.

“I am convinced and confident that in case of military aggression against Artsakh, not only our army but also our entire society will stand in the positions of its defense – military or civilian, male or female. Like me, many women, I am sure, are ready to take up arms to protect their motherland and children. But this is not for the sake of war, but to prove that peace has no alternative.” ^[24]

Anna Hakobyan’s positions on the engagement of women in the military evolved into practical steps in August 2020, when in the scope of the “Women for Peace” campaign, a group of women in Karabakh participated in a seven-day combat firearms drills for the sake of “peace.”[25] This was followed by the announcement[26] of women’s military exercises to be held jointly with the Ministry of Defense of Armenia, the purpose of which was to familiarize women with military life and military skills. In retrospect, we can claim that these were signals of the fragility of the “Women for Peace” campaign that predetermined the formation and participation of the women’s squad led by Anna Hakobyan in the Second Karabakh War.

One of the problematic aspects of the interpretation of peace within the campaign was its depoliticization.

“I am not even talking about political peace. It is the business of politicians and world leaders to negotiate that. But as long as the incentive for such negotiations is peace solely for one’s own people and not for all men and women, as long as the incentive for such negotiations is peace for our time and not peace for all time, such negotiations will not serve their purpose.”^[27]

Thus, in order not to take on additional powers in the settlement of the conflict, and not to create the impression of being involved in the negotiation process, the value of peace was depoliticized and often mythologized. Any conflict in itself has a political nature, and a question arises: how is it possible to peacefully settle it, how is it possible to convey the call for peace to the political entities without politicizing the process? In her speeches during the campaign, Anna Hakobyan insisted that the policymakers themselves should resolve these issues, and women could simply take on the role of promoting the spread of peace.

In this approach, we can again notice the reproduction of the auxiliary, derivative role of women in peace which is familiar to us from the texts of female figures of the previous century. On the one hand, the depoliticization of the idea of ​​peace can be observed as evidence of the failures or ineffectiveness of the political settlement of the conflict, on the other, however, by depoliticizing the issue, Anna Hakobyan circumvented the tangible challenges of the complex relationship between peace and war, driving the campaign even further into the symbolic field.

The Declarative Nature of the Campaign and the Trap of the Symbolic

Throughout the campaign, the texts about the role of women in the peace process were structured as appeals focusing on the need for peace. This speaks about the purely declarative (impractical) nature of the campaign which Anna Hakobyan did not conceal either.^[28]

Although the launch of the campaign was a remarkable step in itself, its rhetoric was for a long time limited to appeals to women for peace from various significant platforms without offering any formal mechanism to join and contribute to the campaign. In the absence of mechanisms to join the campaign, we notice that some groups of women chose their own ways to support it. It is about having jewelry made of molded bullets perceived as a symbol of the campaign. As the first step of the campaign, Anna Hakobyan stated during the visit to the frontlines with the Russian women who joined it:

 “…I believe that all the bullets in the world will melt in the face of the cosmic love of mothers. For example, they will turn into the kind of jewelry I am wearing right now. The jewelry I currently wear is made of melted bullets. It turns out that there is a craftsman in Yerevan who makes jewelry from melted bullets. I didn’t know, I found out about it recently. But as soon as I found out, I thought they would become the symbol of the “Women for Peace” campaign. And every woman who joins the campaign will have such a piece of jewelry. This means that the more women join the campaign, the more bullets will disappear from the world, lose their original meaning and become just an ornament. And this, in turn, means that so many lives will be saved. Of course, this is the language of symbolism but agree that it is not far from reality.” ^[29]

In fact, the bullet jeweler made them from already fired cartridges. As a result, jewelry made from fired cartridges already used for military or military training purposes, became a symbol of the campaign, raising the question of the conflicting relationship between pacifist nature and wearing ammunition as jewelry. Nevertheless, the statement had its effect. The declared symbol of the “Women for Peace” campaign was used by the jeweler to commercialize the idea of ​​peace and promote his own initiative. Many women, from Armenia and abroad, wanting to join the campaign and not having an alternative to participating actively, resorted to buying symbolic jewelry from the jeweler.^[30]

In parallel, Anna Hakobyan was working on making the campaign more institutional. During her visit to Karabakh in May 2020, at a meeting with local women active in various fields, she presented the website covering the “Women for Peace” campaign. It was part of the official website annahakobyan.am and gave a more structured and practical nature to the campaign, allowing individuals and organizations to join it online. The website presented the background, mission, values, and goals of the campaign in a more systematized way, as well as publicized the declaration of the “Women for Peace” campaign more clearly formulating and emphasizing the role of women at the core of the calls for peace. It should be noted that after the Second Karabakh War in 2020, the link to the “Women for Peace” campaign is visible on the official website annahakobyan.am, but the related section and the speeches and messages developed within its scope are unavailable.^[31] This makes it evident how the war defeated the as-yet-unaccomplished initiative of women’s important involvement in the formation and establishment of the peace agenda, leaving the field to the dominant discourses of militancy and the men leading them. Thus, in fact, the activity of the campaign was interrupted.

The Escalation of the Conflict and the Freezing of the Peace Campaign

The Second Karabakh War made the fair need to criticize the apolitical and symbolic layers of the campaign evident. Perhaps, we may consider Anna Hakobyan’s letter and appeal addressed to the first ladies of different countries in the first days of the war as the last step in the campaign:

“…I assure you that with this step you will bring peace to all the peoples of this region, including the people of Azerbaijan whose innocent children, due to the actions of the tyrannical and terrorist government of that country, are being killed along with our children on the battlefield today. I want you to know that my son, Ashot, at this very moment (October 8) as I am writing to you, is on his way to the frontline in a military bus with fellow soldiers. And I want you to know that my son’s life is also at stake for peace.”[32]

While this call to the external audience emphasized the struggle for peace, in the speech addressed to the internal audience, we notice a clear change in the language and wording: the call to fight, to die for the sake of the motherland.

“On the way to Artsakh, my husband told me that our son should also go to posts as a reservist. I told my son on the way to Stepanakert. “Please be well aware, I adore you, but there is nothing nobler in this world than dying for the motherland.” I have said this for the rest of the life to come. No circumstances can change those words in me as a mother, neither today, nor a year, nor ten years from now. And I know that I am not the only one, not that I am not the only one, but I am one of hundreds and thousands as a wife and mother, and that is our victory.” [33]

When addressing participation in the war with the women’s squad, Anna Hakobyan asked if women were not ready to join the peace campaign, then why they did not join her call to participate in the war, making the problematics and the need for self-reflection on her approaches and the content of the campaign even more evident.

The war marginalized the “Women for Peace” campaign and the issue of women’s role in the peace process.

Thus, the Second Karabakh War transformed the role of women calling for peace, contributing to the peace process in one way or another, to the role of fighting women.[34] During the Second Karabakh War, Anna Hakobyan, a supporter of increasing the involvement of women in the military sector and taking up arms and fighting if necessary, was criticized by civil society, various political forces, and broad segments of the public. The core of the criticism was the creation of the “Erato” detachment which cast a shadow over the “sincerity” of the “Women for Peace” campaign. The creation of the “Erato” women’s detachment crystallized the superficial and problematic approach that Anna Hakobyan was guided by in her struggle for peace.

After the war, the social roles attributed to the wives, mothers, and sisters of the victims were enforced again, the voices of those who taught them to “correctly” experience the pain of their loss, and the moral pressures and criticisms of living an active public life intensified. Various groups serving political interests tried to use this issue to build their political careers. Criticizing the public discrimination and restrictions towards soldiers’ loved ones after the war, Anna Hakobyan framed the role of the widows and mothers of those who were killed in the war as strong women who contribute to strengthening the country and fight against injustices.

It is noteworthy that similar discourses are characteristic of post-war societies: they are unfolding in Azerbaijani public speech as well. Wives and mothers of those killed in the army and war are consecrated as long as they have no demands from the state and are at peace with their husbands who are in severe psychological and physical condition as a result of the war.

“… They are only praised when they are unquestioning, undemanding, and at peace with their trauma — otherwise, they are considered undesirable… Aside from its glorification of martyrdom at the expense of trivializing other people’s trauma, you will notice that the campaign also attempts to thrust upon widows of soldiers the responsibility of being strong, militant, and able to come to terms with their pain. [35]

By and large, the [symbolic] campaign for peace was replaced by a means of providing humanitarian and social support to war-affected families. The campaign’s activity on international platforms also became a platform for fleeting conversations about peace from the same platforms and reduced the role of women in the peace agenda completely handing over the activity to the government. “The government is doing everything for the establishment of the peace agenda.”[36]

Almost two years after the war, reviewing the freezing process of the “Women for Peace” campaign, it is important to continue to question whether peace campaigns in Armenia and women’s campaigns, in particular, can conquer the public and political arena with new and more radical content and what actions and needs there are along the way.

Author Mariam Khalatyan

Supported by Women’s Fund Armenia in the framework of the project “On the Right Track: Establishing a European-Latin American Alliance of Women’s Funds to defend human rights and the values of democracy, freedom and diversity from the attack of the rising religious conservatism and the right-wing” implementing by the collective of women’s funds in Europe and Latin America.
Supported by WECF-Germany in the framework of the project “Her Portrayal, Her Rights – Ethical Media in the Caucasus”.

References

1. Yesayan, Z․ (1911). Woman for Peace. Aragats, 36-37․ New York.
2. Enloe, S․ (2018)․ Feminism and Militarism (Khachatryan, G․, Ghazaryan, A․ Trans․)․ Avagyan, Sh․ (Eds․), Feminist Theory Anthology (74-95). Heinrich Böll Foundation.
3. Peilerian, M․ (1914). Upward.
4. Awodola, (2016, October). Peacebuilding in Africa: A Review of the African First Ladies Peace Mission. Conflict Studies Quarterly, Issue 17, 17-31.
5. Liddington, J․ (1989). The Road to Greenham Common: Feminism and Anti-militarism in Britain Since 1820. Syracuse University Press.
6. Masitoh, D. (2020). The Success of Women’s Participation in Resolving Conflicts in Liberia. Journal of Governance, Volume 5, Issue 1, 71-90.
7. Moynagh, M., Forestell, N. (eds.). (2012). Documenting the first wave feminism. Transnational Collaborations and Crosscurrents, Volume 1. University of Toronto Press.
8. Rowe, V. (2009)․ A History of Armenian Women’s Writing 1880-1922, Cambridge Scholars Press Ltd., London․

^[1] 1in․am․ (2011, January 9,)․ Arzu Abdullayeva’s farewell letter in memory of Anahit Bayandur. Retrieved from: https://www.1in.am/6272.html։

^[2] For this activity, they were jointly awarded the Olof Palme International Peace Prize by the Riksdag (Parliament) of Sweden.

^[3] Ghazaryan G. (2020, December 25). Women on the Roadside of the War․ Retrieved from: https://ge.boell.org/en/2020/12/25/kanayk-paterazmi-campezrin

[4] Snip, I. (2020, November 3). Ignoring Women’s Voices in Nagorno-Karabakh War is an Obstacle to Peace. Retrieved from: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/ignoring-womens-voices-nagorno-karabakh-war-obstacle-peace/

^[5] Mari Beilerian (Western Armenian writing: Mari Beilerian) was born in Constantinople. In her early youth, she was an active member of the Hunchakian Party, she was one of the organizers of the “Bab Ali” peaceful demonstration on September 18, 1895, because of which she was persecuted and had to go underground, taking refuge in Egypt. In 1902-1903, in Cairo, she founded and edited the Artemis family literary journal which gave women the opportunity to be involved in the public domain. It stirred interest among women readers of the time enabling the presentation of women’s lives and problems. The peculiarity of the journal was that it allowed any woman to make her voice heard regardless of public speaking skills and experience. Mari Beilerian herself (not only on the pages of Artemis) authored short stories, and journalistic and publicist texts mainly focusing on Armenian women’s rights, education, work, and charity issues.  She taught in the female schools of Constantinople, Smyrna, Eudocia, and Alexandria (See Rowe, V. (2009): A History of Armenian Women’s Writing 1880-1922, Cambridge Scholars Press Ltd., London). On April 24, 1915, and in the following period, Mari Beilerian was among the Armenian intellectuals persecuted and killed in the Ottoman Empire.

[6] Bilal M ․ (2020, July 16)․ The Armenian feminist mind of the beginning of the 20th century about anti-militancy and people’s right to self-defense. [webinar]: Fem library. Retrieved from: https://bit.ly/3fjSDOy

[7] Ibid.

[8] 1in.am. (2011, January 9). Arzu Abdullayeva’s farewell letter in memory of Anahit Bayandur. Retrieved from https://www.1in.am/6272.html

[9] annahakobyan.am. (2018, July 25)․ Speech of RA Prime Minister’s wife Anna Hakobyan at Moscow Tretyakov Gallery. Retrieved from: bit.ly/2SlHPXW

[10] annahakobyan.am․ (2018, October 7). Anna Hakobyan visited the frontline with the Russian women who joined the “Women for Peace” campaign. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/2Mjt2dH

^[11] annahakobyan.am. (2019, April 3). The speech of RA Prime Minister’s wife, Chair of the Board of Trustees of “My Step” and “City of Smile” Charitable Foundations, Anna Hakobyan, at the US Congress ․ Retrieved from: https://bit.ly/2BjN9ox

[12] During the Fourth UN World Conference on Women  (1995, Beijing), the First Lady of Nigeria, Maryam Sani Abacha, addressing the problems of women in Africa, raised the issue of gender equality related to the involvement of women in the processes of settling national, regional and global issues. In light of this, the issue of peace in Africa is highlighted, without which, according to Abacha, women in Africa will be unable to realize their potential and improve their quality of life. The voicing of issues related to women at this conference, and later the implementation of various regional events, formed the basis for the  First Ladies of Nigeria, Gambia, Benin, Uganda, Lesotho, and Burundi to draft the “Declaration of Peace” in 1996, which, after being presented to the Organization of African Unity, marked the formal establishment of the initiative. The “African First Ladies Peace Mission” initiative aims to contribute to the establishment of peace, to eliminate the consequences of war which are especially severe for women and children. (Awodoloa, 2016).

The “African First Ladies Peace Mission” campaign has had a great impact over the years and is still active today. More details about the campaign are on the Facebook page of the campaign at:  https://bit.ly/2N5WjYJ

[13] Peacemaker-activist Leymah Gbowee founded the “Women’s Peacebuilding Network” in Liberia in 2002. The mass movement of women for peace in 1999-2003 was a response to the second Liberian Civil War. The movement began with a small group of women who tried to win their participation in the decision-making process through ritual and other radical actions. Under the leadership of Gbowee, the movement managed to meet with the then president, Charles Taylor, to achieve the president’s resignation, as a result of which a female president was elected in Liberia, and a large number of women participated in the elections. Women’s agency increased and lasting peace was established within the country. (Masitoh, 2020).

^[14] medialab.am․ (2020, July 13). Call to stop hostilities and move towards peace. Anna Hakobyan. Retrieved from: https://medialab.am/80652/

^[15] annahakobyan.am․ (2018, October 7). Anna Hakobyan visited the frontline with the Russian women who joined the “Women for Peace” campaign. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/2Mjt2dH

^[16] Ibid.

^[17] Ibid.

^[18] armtimes.am. (2019, April). Anna Hakobyan’s speech at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Retrieved from: https://armtimes.com/hy/video/6512

[19] annahakobyan.am (2019, April 4)․ Anna Hakobyan’s speech at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Retrieved from:  https://bit.ly/3hB0fyw

[20] The speech of RA Prime Minister’s wife, Chair of the Board of Trustees of “My Step” and “City of Smile” Charitable Foundations, Anna Hakobyan, at the US Congress․ annahakobyan.am․ (2019, April 3). Retrieved from: https://bit.ly/2BjN9ox

[21] annahakobyan.am (2020, October 7). Anna Hakobyan visited the frontline with the Russian women who joined the “Women for Peace” campaign. Retrieved from:  https://bit.ly/3hDa1QM

[22] annahakobyan.am. (2020, November 28)․ Anna Hakobyan visited the border town of Movses․ Retrieved from: https://bit.ly/2YcKsOW

^[23] annahakobyan.am. (2019, December 12)․ “You are the ones who don’t spare efforts day and night to keep the borders of our country strong” Anna Hakobyan met with female cadets of the military training institutions under the Ministry of Defense. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/2Ts9aaa

^[24] annahakobyan.am. (2020, May 20)․ Anna Hakobyan met with women active in Artsakh in Stepanakert. The official website of the “Women for Peace” campaign was presented. Retrieved from: https://bit.ly/37HFQDl

[25] epress.am. (2020, September)․ Anna Hakobyan and the women of Artsakh passed the combat training for peace. Retrieved from: https://epress.am/2020/09/02/1640-4.html

[26] Within the framework of the program, the participants will be trained for 45 days in barracks conditions, acquiring soldier skills. The daily life of the participants will be organized according to the format common in the Armed Forces, according to the daily schedule of the military unit: wake up at 6:30, physical exercise, breakfast, classroom and field exercises, etc. See armtimes.com. (2020, September)․ On the initiative of Anna Hakobyan and with the support of the RA Ministry of Defense, military drills for women aged 18 to 27 will be held. Retrieved from: https://www.armtimes.com/hy/article/196136

^[27] annahakobyan.am․ (2019 April 4). Anna Hakobyan’s speech at Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Retrieved from:  https://bit.ly/3hB0fyw

^[28] annahakobyan.am․ (2020, July 13)․ Anna Hakobyan, “The aim of the “Women for Peace” campaign is to remind that the victims on the border are not statistics, but real lives, and we have no right not to be accountable for every life.” Retrieved from: https://bit.ly/3ecpIwa

^[29] annahakobyan.am․ (2018, October 7). Anna Hakobyan visited the frontline with the Russian women who joined the “Women for Peace” campaign. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/2Mjt2dH

[30] We learned about this from the Facebook page of the same jeweler where there is a photo album “Women for Peace.” Here are the pictures of all the people who bought the jewelry from the master. The pictures are captioned with each one’s profession, location, and a text stating that by purchasing the jewelry, they joined the “Women for Peace” campaign. Politicians, public figures, artists, and journalists are among those people. Details at: Hayar Jewelry Artak Tadevosyan. Facebook. Retrieved from: https://bit.ly/2YNHAHn

[31] Due to the unavailability of the section, links to some quotes have been replaced with materials from other media sources.

[32] a1plus.am. (2020, October 21). My people are in a forced war. Anna Hakobyan appealed to all the First Ladies. Retrieved from: https://a1plus.am/hy/article/382980

[33] annahakobyan.am. (2020, September 30)․ Anna Hakobyan met with female parliamentarians of Artsakh in Stepanakert. Retrieved from: https://infocom.am/hy/article/37568

[34] On October 26, Anna Hakobyan, following the call of her husband, RA Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, declared that she was creating a women’s squad that would go to Karabakh and participate in combat operations. After a ten-day training and examination, the squad departed to posts to perform a combat mission. Anna Hakobyan continued to remain in posts with the “Erato” women’s detachment even after the tripartite statement on the cessation of hostilities.

[35] Shahmarzadeh, N․ (2022, April 16)․ The silent victims of war․ Retrieved from: https://oc-media.org/opinions/opinion-the-silent-victims-of-war/

[36] annahakobyan.am (2022, July 7). The wife of the Prime Minister visited Nerkin Hand. Retrieved from: https://bit.ly/3OJI1tW

Funded by

The post The War from a Woman’s Perspective: on the “Women for Peace” Campaign appeared first on Socioscope.