Round Table Summaries

The Armenian Diaspora, by its very nature, is a political phenomenon, because it was created as a result of historical and political circumstances and has served national and political objectives throughout its existence. In its present form, it embodies a legacy spanning many decades, with both significant achievements and notable shortcomings. Although the Diaspora has continued to evolve in other ways over time, those developments have not altered its fundamental character or identity.

There is a need for a strategy that improves the life of the Diaspora, strengthens its vitality and resilience, and elevates its effectiveness through better communication and structural reform.

To preserve and develop Armenian identity, the Diaspora must refresh its approaches and its institutional toolkit, with the goal of expanding its reach and accessibility while fostering greater cooperation among its principal stakeholders. An important element of this toolkit is the strengthening of Armenia–Diaspora relations. Equally vital is instilling national values in Armenian youth, encouraging them to assume responsibility, and entrusting them with overcoming a range of future challenges.

It is also essential to develop the Diaspora’s economic potential and channel it toward advancing a pan-Armenian agenda, while using that economic strength as a means of securing a seat at the table where international interests are shaped and negotiated.

The Diaspora’s strategic role in addressing national issues need be complementary to that of the Armenian state and, whenever possible, coordinated with it. Under the current circumstances, however, it will often be necessary to work independently of the official Republic of Armenia (represented by its present authorities) and the concept of “Real Armenia.” The strategy of capitulation embodied in the “Real Armenia” doctrine is not a path to peace. Rather, it is a strategy of managed decline, continuously diminishing expectations, and ultimately national self-destruction. It cannot guarantee the nation’s security today and, even more tragically, it closes the door to any genuine peace founded upon justice in the future.

In this context, the Armenian nation—primarily through the efforts of the Diaspora—must reorganize itself and develop and refine global instruments of influence that will enable it to become an indispensable and irreplaceable force for the survival of both the Armenian state and the Armenian nation.

The Armenian nation is at its strongest when its state agenda and its pan-Armenian national agenda complement one another, advancing along parallel paths toward the same objective. In reality, these agendas are mutually reinforcing. Portraying them as conflicting—or setting them against one another—is both artificial and detrimental to the interests of the entire nation, including the survival and well-being of the Armenian state itself.

Ideally, the Diaspora and the Armenian state should function as independent actors pursuing the same overarching goal. When the state comes under pressure, the nation must be able to remain steadfast. By operating independently, it becomes possible to circumvent policies that undermine our state and jeopardize the nation’s long-term security.

The Diaspora’s strategic national role in addressing pan-Armenian challenges is ultimately determined by the extent to which the Diaspora itself is willing to assume that role. To this end, its political agenda should include two closely interconnected priorities: first, creating a mechanism through which the collective political will of the Diaspora can be expressed; and second, integrating that collective political will into the political agenda of the Republic of Armenia. These objectives can be pursued through elections or other forms of collective organization, both of which require broad pan-Diasporan and pan-Armenian discussion. Taking into account all opportunities and potential obstacles, the Diaspora itself must determine the priorities, direction, and course of its political agenda.

Society in the Republic of Armenia is weary, demoralized, and disillusioned. The determination that existed in the 1990s no longer exists today. Armenia’s reality is fundamentally different from what it was just six or seven years ago, when there was a shared pan-Armenian agenda pursued by a “trinity” of actors: the Republic of Armenia, the Republic of Artsakh, and the Diaspora. Today, only one principal actor remains committed to advancing that same pan-Armenian agenda: the Diaspora. The authorities of Artsakh no longer possess the resources and capabilities they once had. Meanwhile, the third actor—the Republic of Armenia, represented by its current government—not only has ceased to pursue the issues of Artsakh and the Armenian Genocide, but has taken the opposite approach by attempting to prevent, or at the very least hinder, the other actors from advancing those causes as well.

As a result, the responsibility for raising and defending issues on the pan-Armenian agenda has fallen largely upon the Diaspora. This is especially true with respect to Artsakh. Following the 44-day war of 2020, Azerbaijan’s genocidal policies, and the complete depopulation of Artsakh’s Armenian population in 2023, the scope of these issues has broadened considerably. It now encompasses the protection of the rights of forcibly displaced Armenians and prisoners, as well as the preservation of Artsakh’s historical and cultural heritage.

At the same time, the campaign directed against the Armenian Apostolic Church—the oldest institution of the Armenian nation—cannot be reconciled with any legitimate national agenda. Consequently, defending the Armenian Apostolic Church against this campaign has itself become an integral part of the pan-Armenian national agenda.

The Diaspora, through its diverse institutions and the capabilities of influential individuals, possesses the capacity to defend Armenian interests, preserve our heritage, and advance Armenian aspirations across all six inhabited continents. This potential can complement the forward-leaning elements of state diplomacy by elevating Armenian issues on the international stage, formulating and advocating policy positions, defending the rights of the Armenian people, and expanding the Republic of Armenia’s sphere of influence in ways that differ from the traditional tools of state diplomacy. For the Armenian nation to endure, the global Armenian community is called upon to act as the sovereign master of its own destiny—a developing homeland supported by a Diaspora that is itself a geopolitical force.

In many respects, the Armenian Diaspora today constitutes an independent geopolitical force, more influential than the governments of many countries. It operates within a global environment shaped by intense competition and conflict between nation-states and transnational networks. In this context, one of the principal objectives of the Diaspora’s political agenda must be to support efforts aimed at ensuring the security and survival of the Armenian state.

Expanding the Diaspora’s potential and placing that potential in the service of the pan-Armenian agenda also requires initiatives that, while non-political in form, are inherently political in substance. Such initiatives include mapping and assessing the Diaspora’s human, institutional, and economic resources; increasing the presence and influence of Armenians in global policy, academic, technological, media, and civil society platforms; preserving existing Armenian historical and cultural centers while establishing new ones; strengthening ties and cooperation among Armenian communities worldwide; and protecting and sustaining vulnerable Armenian communities.

Introduction

The second roundtable of the Diaspora Mobilization Conference was dedicated to examining the role of national values and the Armenian Church in the preservation and development of Armenian identity within the context of the Diaspora. The discussions took place during a period when the Armenian people are facing numerous challenges—political, security-related, demographic, cultural, and value-based. These challenges affect not only the Republic of Armenia but the entire Diaspora, making it necessary to rethink approaches toward preserving Armenian identity, strengthening pan-Armenian cooperation, and enhancing national organization.

Throughout the presentations and discussions, speakers and participants clearly expressed the conviction that the future of the Armenian people depends not only on external circumstances, but first and foremost on our collective ability to preserve our identity, strengthen our values, and coordinate our potential in pursuit of common goals. In this regard, national values—including the Armenian Church, educational institutions, community structures, and Armenia–Diaspora relations—continue to remain the fundamental pillars of Armenian survival and development.

Armenian Identity: From Historical Heritage to a Vision for the Future

At the center of the discussions was the issue of Armenian identity. It was emphasized that for centuries the Armenian people have succeeded in preserving their identity even in the absence of statehood, under conditions of displacement, persecution, and genocide. This reality is not accidental; rather, it is the result of a system of values that was shaped over centuries on the foundations of Armenian history, culture, language, and faith.

Armenian identity was presented as a multilayered reality that includes collective memory, cultural heritage, language, Christian values, responsibility toward the homeland, and the experience of community life. Together, all these elements form the foundation that has enabled the Armenian people to survive and to rebuild themselves during the most difficult periods of history.

At the same time, it was acknowledged that the Armenian identity today faces new challenges. Globalization, the rise of individualism, the influence of multicultural environments, the decline of language use, and the changing conditions of life for younger generations require new approaches to preserving identity. Today, it is no longer sufficient simply to inherit identity; it must be consciously lived, reinterpreted, and transmitted to new generations through approaches that correspond to contemporary realities.

During the discussions, it was emphasized that the preservation of Armenian identity should not be limited to a defensive approach. It is necessary not only to safeguard the heritage received from the past, but also to develop it so that it continues to remain a living, creative, and inspiring force for future generations.

The Armenian Church: The Spiritual Homeland of Armenians and the Core of National Identity

The majority of speakers placed particular importance on the role of the Armenian Church. It was emphasized that, throughout history, the Armenian Church has served as one of the principal foundations for the preservation of the Armenian people’s identity. It is not only a religious institution, but also a center of national memory, culture, education, and collective unity.

It was recalled that the adoption of Christianity was one of the most significant turning points in Armenian history. The creation of the Armenian alphabet, the translation of the Holy Bible, and the development of Armenian literature and culture are closely connected with the mission of the Church. For centuries, the Church became the institution that preserved national consciousness, particularly during periods when state structures were absent.

The discussions repeatedly emphasized that the mission of the Armenian Church remains relevant today. The Church is called not only to preserve the heritage but also to guide Armenians on a path of spiritual, moral, and national renewal. Especially within the Diaspora, the Church continues to serve as one of the unique platforms where Armenians of different generations, backgrounds, and worldviews come together and rediscover their sense of belonging.

The experiences of France and other Diaspora communities demonstrate that communities, schools, and cultural institutions formed around the Church continue to be among the most effective means of resisting assimilation. In places where ecclesiastical and educational structures exist, national life remains more vibrant, and the engagement of younger generations becomes easier.

The Diaspora: A Diverse Yet Unified Pan-Armenian Reality

The present and future of the Diaspora occupied a significant place in the discussions. It was emphasized that following the Genocide, Armenians succeeded in creating organized communities in various countries around the world that preserved the language, culture, and national identity. Schools, churches, cultural organizations, and youth organizations served for decades as the primary instruments of this process.

However, today’s Diaspora is significantly different from that of previous generations. Armenian communities now live within diverse political, economic, and cultural environments. Over time, they have developed different organizational cultures, methods of operation, and ways of thinking. Consequently, the contemporary Diaspora has a multicultural and diverse character.

During the discussions, this reality was viewed not as a problem, but as a source of strength. Armenians living in different countries have accumulated diverse experiences, knowledge, and capabilities that can contribute to the advancement of the entire Armenian nation. This diversity can become a source of national strength if we succeed in organizing and coordinating it around common goals.

For this reason, participants emphasized that one of the key challenges of the future will be developing a culture that encourages mutual recognition, cooperation, and the exchange of experiences. The Diaspora should be viewed as one transnational Armenian entity, whose various segments live within different realities but pursue the same national mission.

Armenia–Diaspora Cooperation: A Pan-Armenian Priority

One of the most frequently recurring themes in the discussions and participants’ reflections was the necessity for closer cooperation between Armenia and the Diaspora.

All participants agreed that the destinies of Armenia and the Diaspora are interconnected. Developments taking place in Armenia have a direct impact on the vitality of the Diaspora, while the Diaspora continues to represent an important human, intellectual, cultural, political, and economic resource for Armenia.

Participants emphasized the need to move toward more practical forms of cooperation. It is not enough merely to speak about pan-Armenian unity; it is necessary to establish clear mechanisms that will facilitate the exchange of knowledge, the sharing of experiences, and continuous collaboration among various organizations and institutions.

Particular importance was given to the issue of engaging young people. Participants stressed the need to create new platforms that will allow youth to become involved in pan-Armenian initiatives, develop leadership skills, and participate in decision-making processes. The preservation of Armenian identity and the future of pan-Armenian cooperation will largely depend on the active involvement of younger generations.

Conclusion and Proposed Directions

Based on the ideas expressed during the discussions and the responses of participants, it can be stated that the preservation of Armenian identity continues to remain a pan-Armenian priority. However, the policies advanced by the authorities of the Republic of Armenia seek to reshape Armenian identity by contrasting a “real Armenia” with historical Armenia, thereby creating a deep division within national consciousness. This process is expressed through educational, historical, and symbolic changes (the diminishing of the significance of Artsakh and the Genocide, the Turkification of place names, and other developments) and is accompanied by a weakening of patriotic sentiment. At the same time, attacks against the Church and these changes are viewed as concessions to pressure from Turkey and Azerbaijan. As a result, the divide between Armenia and the Diaspora deepens, placing the preservation of collective memory and national identity at risk.

At the same time, the discussions demonstrated that there is a need to adopt more practical approaches. Participants repeatedly emphasized that unity around national objectives must be accompanied by concrete actions, coordinated efforts, and sustained cooperation.

In this direction, the following priorities were considered particularly important:

• Strengthening Armenia–Diaspora relations and developing institutional cooperation.
• Expanding the involvement of young people in national and pan-Armenian processes.
• Creating platforms for the exchange of pan-Armenian knowledge, experiences, and professional expertise.
• Developing more coordinated and consistent cooperation among Armenian communities.
• Developing modern approaches for preserving and transmitting national identity, including language, culture, and Christian values.
• Establishing closer partnerships among Church, educational, and community institutions.

Finally, the overall message of the roundtable was that the challenges facing the Armenian people can only be overcome through a united, organized, and cooperative global Armenian community. Armenian identity, national values, and the Armenian Church continue to serve as the foundations of this collective strength.

However, success in the future will depend on our ability to build upon these foundations by creating new forms of cooperation, new initiatives, and a new vision that will serve the long-term development and vitality of the Armenian people.

The entire course of world history has been a struggle to expand influence. In that struggle, we have adopted a defensive posture, whereas we must also become active participants in the competition—economically, scientifically, and in other fields—while ensuring the comprehensive development of our people and our state.

We are a remarkable nation. We have endured immense hardships and still succeeded in establishing a state; we have not disappeared. We must also take pride in our past, for it can inspire and motivate our younger generations.

The existence of our Diaspora provides us with a tremendous advantage in this global competition. Through its extensive network, the Diaspora can accomplish things that the Republic of Armenia cannot achieve on its own.

We must not become discouraged by our present setbacks. Defeats are temporary; they will be followed by victories if we know where we are headed.

One must continue to struggle and move forward to survive. Otherwise, others will not allow you to develop. It may seem that the notion of competition among nations is outdated, because global movements sometimes appear to obscure that reality. Yet fierce competition—though often disguised—continues unabated.

The issue of Artsakh remains the most critical one. It is the key link that must be grasped correctly if we are to pull the entire chain in the right direction. The depopulation of Artsakh is a recent tragedy. Even if states, acting out of their own interests, oppose the return of the Armenians of Artsakh, they nevertheless cannot publicly declare such a position or deny support for the principle of the right of return itself.

Unfortunately, the full potential of the Diaspora has not yet been fully utilized. Many continue to measure the Diaspora’s support primarily in financial terms, which is why some dismissively refer to it as a “cash cow.”

Although the dual citizenship law was adopted in 1997, the Government of Armenia did not actively encourage members of the Diaspora to become citizens of the Republic of Armenia.

The abolition of the Ministry of Diaspora and its replacement with the Office of the High Commissioner was a misguided decision, as it dismantled the traditional Armenia–Diaspora relationship. Established Armenian organizations were replaced by individuals closely aligned with the government.

At the 2024 Armenia–Diaspora Conference, Prime Minister Pashinyan declared, “We do not need your humanitarian assistance,” a statement that was deeply offensive to the Diaspora.

Pashinyan’s policies—particularly toward Diaspora organizations—as well as the direction of his domestic agenda, have become a serious obstacle to healthy Armenia–Diaspora relations.

The importance of preserving Armenia–Diaspora relations lies in fostering the development of human capital and professional expertise. The abolition of the Ministry of Diaspora sent a clear signal aimed at weakening that relationship. It is evident that one of the objectives of the current Armenian government is to sever these ties. What remains unclear is whether this policy is being imposed by external powers.

Another major concern is the proposed constitutional amendments, specifically the removal of references to the Declaration of Independence and to the principle of Nagorno-Karabakh’s right to self-determination.

We must pursue policies that give priority to maintaining good relations with all of Armenia’s neighboring countries. However, this does not mean accepting Russia’s silence regarding the incursions into Armenia’s sovereign borders, nor does it mean supporting forces that do not even know “who the Armenians are and what they represent.”

Neither the United States, nor the European Union, nor Russia is genuinely concerned with Armenia’s interests. Armenia’s national security strategy must begin with the recognition of this reality.

Our role—often carried out quietly—is to advance the political interests of Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh.

We have several political objectives, some of which are already being actively pursued:

1. Initiating legal proceedings in Switzerland against SOCAR Trading SA for failing to comply with OECD Guidelines, on the grounds that its parent company, SOCAR, financed Azerbaijan’s 2020 war effort and military procurement.
2. Defending the right of return of the people forcibly displaced from Nagorno-Karabakh.
3. Securing the release of Armenians who are being unlawfully detained in Baku.
4. Protecting the Armenian cultural heritage of Nagorno-Karabakh.
5. Addressing the seizure and destruction of Armenian homes and property, including in Stepanakert.
6. Ending Azerbaijan’s occupation of 240 square kilometers of the sovereign territory of the Republic of Armenia.

Therefore, we must:

• Present these arguments in a compelling and persuasive manner before international organizations—first and foremost the United Nations—as well as national governments.
• Dispel the narrative, both domestically and internationally, that raising these issues will inevitably lead to war with Azerbaijan.

All of this can be done without resorting to populist accusations against Armenia’s current government, which only fuel the already existing climate of hate speech.

We must offer our allies well-conceived and credible initiatives—not by presenting ourselves as nationalist forces, but as a movement genuinely committed to the protection of minority rights. We should provide financial support to organizations working in this direction, and we should also support media outlets, even those outside our own political circles, that independently carry out this work. Consider this: why has Armenia never established an independent public opinion polling institute? Would it not be better to have a clearer understanding of what is taking place? Governments come and go, but international law endures.

Armenia represents a unique case in Diaspora studies. As Diaspora scholar Khachig Tölölyan has argued, Armenia is not merely a nation-state in the conventional sense but a “transnation”—a nation whose majority lives outside its borders. This reality requires a distinct model of governance.

As a result of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s administration, Armenia–Diaspora relations have deteriorated in three principal areas: institutional, ideological, and strategic.

Within the institutional sphere, this deterioration is reflected in the abolition of the Ministry of Diaspora, the marginalization of Diaspora affairs, the discontinuation of pan-Armenian conferences, and the sharp decline in joint constructive initiatives.

Within the ideological sphere, it is reflected in the redefinition of Armenian national identity and its implications for the Diaspora; the concept of “Real Armenia” as opposed to “Historical Armenia”; the rewriting of history textbooks; and the deterioration of Church–State relations.

Within the strategic sphere, it is reflected in the loss of Artsakh, the collapse of Diaspora confidence, the ethnic cleansing of Artsakh, and the abandonment of the Armenian Genocide agenda.

The main reasons for the failure of Armenia’s Diaspora policy include the divergence between the state’s political vision and that of the Diaspora, mutual distrust, the absence of an appropriate institutional framework governing Armenia–Diaspora relations, and other related factors.

Because of the Armenian Genocide, Armenian communities were established in many different countries. When Armenians later emigrated from those countries, they carried with them elements of the local cultures they had adopted. This was further supplemented by emigrants from Armenia itself, giving rise to new Diaspora communities. Today, we have highly diverse and heterogeneous Armenian Diasporas.

Lebanon is a prime example of this phenomenon. Within the Diaspora, unity is often essential for survival, while foreign powers may seek to exploit divisions within Armenian communities for their own benefit.

The challenges in Armenia–Diaspora relations are not new. However, under the current administration, all previous limits have been crossed. It is evident that dissatisfaction with the Diaspora did not begin only recently, although it has become far more pronounced today.

After the Armenian Genocide, when the League of Nations was considering where to resettle displaced Armenians, Turkey actively worked to prevent Armenians from settling along its borders—in Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq—and instead sought to direct them to places such as Cyprus and Madagascar. What Turkey failed to accomplish then, did it not attempt to achieve during the Lebanese Civil War by weakening the Armenian Diaspora and making its survival more difficult?

Today, Armenia’s current authorities view the Diaspora as a burden, much as they have viewed Artsakh.

Nevertheless, we must remain committed to Armenian statehood and, following a change in government, dedicate ourselves to restoring what has been lost.

Recently, a growing view has emerged that the Armenian communities of the Middle East should become merely cultural entities. However, we must not overlook the fact that Armenians in the Middle East also possess political rights and political representation. Reducing these communities to purely cultural institutions would amount to political suicide. The Armenian communities of the Middle East can and should continue their struggle for the unity of Armenia and the Diaspora.

Dreams cannot have an expiration date; they are eternal. We cannot compromise on our fundamental national objectives. Temporary priorities may be established from time to time, but the struggle for a Free, Independent, and United Armenia must continue.

International Models of Homeland–Diaspora Cooperation

ISRAEL

A systematic approach to working with the Diaspora

What has Israel done?

• Enacted the Law of Return, organizing large-scale and systematic repatriation.
• Established a strong global institution, the Jewish Agency for Israel.
• Developed targeted programs, such as Birthright Israel, which brings young Jews to Israel.

Results

• Large-scale immigration and inflows of capital.
• A powerful global lobbying network.
• Strong support for the country’s defense during times of crisis.

Israel places great importance on repatriation and on preserving and strengthening Jewish identity.

The Diaspora is regarded as an integral part of the state—not as an “external community.”

IRELAND

What has Ireland done?

• Created a global network of Irish communities.
• Actively engaged the Diaspora in the country’s investment initiatives.
• Launched programs such as the Global Irish Network.

Results

• Attracted international companies to invest in the Irish economy.
• Became one of Europe’s leading technology hubs.

The Diaspora helped revive the country’s economy and build a global network.

INDIA

What has India done?

• Provides support for Indian professionals living abroad. Overseas Indians benefit from special legal statuses such as OCI (Overseas Citizen of India) and PIO (Person of Indian Origin).
• Established close ties with the Indian IT Diaspora, particularly in Silicon Valley.
• Implemented repatriation and cooperation programs.
• Organizes the annual Pravasi Bharatiya Divas convention.

Results

• Rapid development of the information technology sector.
• An influx of expertise, knowledge, and investment.

The Diaspora serves as a technological bridge for the country.

CHINA

What has China done?

• Established the Overseas Chinese Affairs Office.
• Actively encouraged entrepreneurs to return.
• Created favorable conditions for investment from the Diaspora.
• Utilized the Diaspora to expand into international markets.

Results

• Rapid industrial development.
• Global business expansion.

The Diaspora is viewed as an economic resource and an engine for national development.

TURKEY

What has Turkey done?

• Established the Presidency for Turks Abroad and Related Communities (YTB).
• Provides state support for Turkish schools and cultural centers abroad.

Results

• Through the integration of cultural and political initiatives, it has successfully organized and mobilized its Diaspora politically.

FRANCE

What has France done?

• Established the Assembly of French Citizens Abroad as a representative institution for the French Diaspora.
• French citizens living abroad have the right both to vote and to run for public office.

Results

• Institutionalized the political participation of French citizens residing abroad.

Practical Recommendations

1. The Armenian Diaspora should adopt a Declaration on the Rights of Artsakh, including the preparation of a roadmap for protecting those rights.
2. Establish a Pan-Diasporan Armenian Parliament, elected by Diaspora Armenians, to serve as the representative body of the Armenian Diaspora.

The role of the Diaspora needs to move beyond the traditional confines of charitable and cultural activities and be positioned within the spheres of international law and political influence. This approach views the Diaspora as a strategic actor.

The concept of conducting diplomacy parallel to that of the Armenian state is theoretically attractive, but in practice it remains dependent on the political will of the states from which intervention is expected. International law often functions within the constraints of power politics rather than through the consistent application of legal principles alone.

The concept of the “Right of Diasporas” is both innovative and thought-provoking. However, the current international system is still fundamentally based on the principle of sovereign states. Consequently, this concept should be regarded more as a long-term vision than as a political program that can realistically be implemented soon.

Strategic Proposal: Establish a Global Armenian Legal and Diplomatic Network

To ensure that the influence of the Armenian Diaspora becomes coordinated, institutionalized, and sustainable over the long term, it is essential to establish a permanent global network bringing together:

• International legal experts
• Diplomats
• Academics
• Political analysts
• Human rights specialists
• Armenian Diaspora organizations

The principal mission of this network would be to:

1. Defend the right of return to Artsakh.
2. Advance the issue of Armenian prisoners through international legal and diplomatic channels.
3. Further develop the legal framework concerning the Armenian Genocide and the pursuit of reparations.
4. Continuously monitor issues relating to Armenia’s sovereignty and democratic development.
5. Promote the theoretical and practical development of the concept of the “Right of Diasporas.”

Genocide as an Ongoing Process

The genocide perpetrated against the Armenian people should not be viewed solely as the historical events of 1915, but rather as a continuing, organized, and progressively unfolding process.

Strategic Proposal: Establish a Global Armenian Security Council

The central premise is that the Armenian people need a permanent institution that addresses genocidal threats not merely as historical or legal issues, but as matters of national security.

Global Armenian Educational Renaissance 2040

Throughout history, the Armenian people’s survival has depended not only on statehood or military victories, but also on the creation of a strong national identity rooted in culture, language, and education.

This approach examines the issue from a 50- to 100-year perspective, focusing on the factors that determine the nation’s survival across successive generations.

National identity is preserved through institutions. Historical experience demonstrates that the Armenian nation’s greatest achievements have resulted from investments in education and culture. A realistic assessment of today’s demographic and cultural challenges—particularly the statistics regarding Armenian schools—indicates that the current system is inadequate to meet long-term needs.

Accordingly, it is proposed to establish the “Global Armenian Educational Renaissance 2040” initiative, with the following objectives:

1. Increase enrollment in Armenian Diaspora schools to 30–40 percent within the next 15 years.
2. Establish charter schools, immersion schools, and bilingual education models in countries throughout the Diaspora.
3. Create a global Armenian Educational Incubator to support the establishment of new Armenian schools and innovative educational programs.
4. Expand online and technology-based educational platforms to reach families whose children do not attend Armenian schools.
5. Develop a unified international strategy for transmitting Armenian identity, language, and history to future generations.

Strengthening the Organizational, Financial, and Political Capacity of the Diaspora

Another major area of focus centers on the practical requirements for strengthening the Armenian Diaspora organizationally, financially, and politically by improving its systems of governance, organization, and influence.

The principal strength of this approach lies in its practical and realistic nature. Since most of the Diaspora is not directly engaged in Armenian national activities, it is essential to reach these broader communities. Emphasis is placed on financial independence, as sustainable economic infrastructure is indispensable for long-term effectiveness. Equally important is distinguishing between the Armenian state and its government, so that political disagreements do not evolve into indifference toward the interests of the state itself.

Accordingly, it is proposed to establish a “Global Armenian Diaspora Development and Endowment Fund,” with the following primary objectives:

1. Ensure the long-term financial sustainability of Armenian Diaspora institutions.
2. Support leadership development and organizational programs for the next generation.
3. Develop digital communications and pan-Armenian information platforms.
4. Finance community-building initiatives and programs that strengthen political influence.
5. Study and develop legislative models for institutional representation of the Diaspora within the governmental system of the Republic of Armenia.