Pub Date : 2020-01-01DOI: 10.3366/edinburgh/9781474458566.003.0004
Tsolin Nalbantian
Chapter 3 examines the 1956 Catholicos election in Lebanon.While the excitement and success of the repatriation movement was a public relations victory for the USSR supported by local Armenian institutions and assisted by Lebanese and Syrian governments, this election became a site of contestation by Cold War powers and by their state and non-state allies and proxies in the Middle East. This analysis allows us to look at the Cold War in the Middle East not from the top down, through the eyes of Washington or Moscow (or Lebanon’s or Egypt’s state authorities, for that matter) during flash points like the 1958 U.S. intervention in Lebanon or the U.S. and Soviet reactions to the Tripartite Aggression against Egypt in 1956. Rather, in that election, Armenians made use of Cold War tensions to designate a leader of the Armenian Church who was seen to suit the community’s interests. That story also expands our understanding of Lebanon’s Armenians: from refugees and outsiders in national politics to true participants, whose own internal politics, moreover, were of interest to Lebanon’s authorities and who by now felt free to invade and use public spaces beyond their own neighborhoods to make political statements.
{"title":"Cold War, Bottom-up: The 1956 Catholicos Election","authors":"Tsolin Nalbantian","doi":"10.3366/edinburgh/9781474458566.003.0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9781474458566.003.0004","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 3 examines the 1956 Catholicos election in Lebanon.While the excitement and success of the repatriation movement was a public relations victory for the USSR supported by local Armenian institutions and assisted by Lebanese and Syrian governments, this election became a site of contestation by Cold War powers and by their state and non-state allies and proxies in the Middle East. This analysis allows us to look at the Cold War in the Middle East not from the top down, through the eyes of Washington or Moscow (or Lebanon’s or Egypt’s state authorities, for that matter) during flash points like the 1958 U.S. intervention in Lebanon or the U.S. and Soviet reactions to the Tripartite Aggression against Egypt in 1956. Rather, in that election, Armenians made use of Cold War tensions to designate a leader of the Armenian Church who was seen to suit the community’s interests. That story also expands our understanding of Lebanon’s Armenians: from refugees and outsiders in national politics to true participants, whose own internal politics, moreover, were of interest to Lebanon’s authorities and who by now felt free to invade and use public spaces beyond their own neighborhoods to make political statements.","PeriodicalId":120034,"journal":{"name":"Armenians Beyond Diaspora","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115152311","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-01DOI: 10.3366/edinburgh/9781474458566.003.0002
Tsolin Nalbantian
Chapter 1 investigates Lebanese Armenians’ triangulations and balancing acts vis-à-vis the Lebanese state, its wider Arab environment, and the Armenian Socialist Soviet Republic (ASSR) around the time of Lebanon’s independence in the mid 1940s. I pursue this inquiry by closely analyzing Armenian language newspapers published in Beirut. These often ideologically opposed newspapers, the leftist Ararad, the communist Joghovourti Tzain, the capitalist yet supporter of the Armenian Socialist Soviet Republic (ASSR) Zartonk, and the firmly right-wing nationalist Dashnak Aztag reflected the issues of interest of the day. I explore four themes. The first is Armenians’ position in and vis-à-vis the Lebanese polity as well as vis-à-vis Syria. A second concerns language, and specifically the multiple roles of Arabic and its relationship with Armenian. The next one has to do with the ambiguities of spaces relevant for Armenians in and beyond Lebanon, including the ASSR. And a last one concerns the fascinating political positioning of the church that, although conservative, felt forced to support communist Armenia and the USSR as the ASSR’s protector.
{"title":"Repositioning Armenians in Newly Post-Colonial Nation-states: Lebanon and Syria, 1945–1946","authors":"Tsolin Nalbantian","doi":"10.3366/edinburgh/9781474458566.003.0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9781474458566.003.0002","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 1 investigates Lebanese Armenians’ triangulations and balancing acts vis-à-vis the Lebanese state, its wider Arab environment, and the Armenian Socialist Soviet Republic (ASSR) around the time of Lebanon’s independence in the mid 1940s. I pursue this inquiry by closely analyzing Armenian language newspapers published in Beirut. These often ideologically opposed newspapers, the leftist Ararad, the communist Joghovourti Tzain, the capitalist yet supporter of the Armenian Socialist Soviet Republic (ASSR) Zartonk, and the firmly right-wing nationalist Dashnak Aztag reflected the issues of interest of the day. I explore four themes. The first is Armenians’ position in and vis-à-vis the Lebanese polity as well as vis-à-vis Syria. A second concerns language, and specifically the multiple roles of Arabic and its relationship with Armenian. The next one has to do with the ambiguities of spaces relevant for Armenians in and beyond Lebanon, including the ASSR. And a last one concerns the fascinating political positioning of the church that, although conservative, felt forced to support communist Armenia and the USSR as the ASSR’s protector.","PeriodicalId":120034,"journal":{"name":"Armenians Beyond Diaspora","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132718532","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-01DOI: 10.3366/edinburgh/9781474458566.003.0006
Tsolin Nalbantian
The conclusion returns to the need to reexamine the history of Lebanon and its Armenian population. To understand Lebanon in the years following independence one must engage deeply with their Armenian inhabitants and explore how they fashioned and refashioned belonging in the everyday in a variety of spheres: social, religious, cultural, and political. To understand Armenians one does not have to consider them as part of a larger diaspora, but rather as active local inhabitants engaged in layered power struggles. To grasp the complexity of the Cold War in the Middle East, one must examine not only how American and Soviet powers and state proxies engaged with one another, but also how this environment was used and manipulated by societal actors. Taken together, all this demonstrates not only the importance of studying Armenians in Lebanon but also the very necessity of doing so. Armenians Beyond Diaspora pushes Armenians from the margins into the center, not to insert them artificially into a larger history that has already been written, but into a space that calls for additional explorations of marginal populations, power struggles, changing notions of belonging, and the adaptability of the nation.
{"title":"Conclusion","authors":"Tsolin Nalbantian","doi":"10.3366/edinburgh/9781474458566.003.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9781474458566.003.0006","url":null,"abstract":"The conclusion returns to the need to reexamine the history of Lebanon and its Armenian population. To understand Lebanon in the years following independence one must engage deeply with their Armenian inhabitants and explore how they fashioned and refashioned belonging in the everyday in a variety of spheres: social, religious, cultural, and political. To understand Armenians one does not have to consider them as part of a larger diaspora, but rather as active local inhabitants engaged in layered power struggles. To grasp the complexity of the Cold War in the Middle East, one must examine not only how American and Soviet powers and state proxies engaged with one another, but also how this environment was used and manipulated by societal actors. Taken together, all this demonstrates not only the importance of studying Armenians in Lebanon but also the very necessity of doing so. Armenians Beyond Diaspora pushes Armenians from the margins into the center, not to insert them artificially into a larger history that has already been written, but into a space that calls for additional explorations of marginal populations, power struggles, changing notions of belonging, and the adaptability of the nation.","PeriodicalId":120034,"journal":{"name":"Armenians Beyond Diaspora","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133869916","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-01DOI: 10.3366/edinburgh/9781474458566.003.0005
Tsolin Nalbantian
Chapter 4 investigates Armenians’ stance in the 1957 elections and in the ‘general’ Lebanese and the intra-Armenian mini-civil war of 1958. Armenian parties participated in, and contributed to, political tensions in Lebanon. Simultaneously, they used their position in the Lebanese political system to jostle for power within their own community – a development that turned violent and ended only in December 1958, almost two months after the Lebanese mini-civil war had ended. This tension and violent confrontation between Armenian parties and their armed men had a crucial spatial effect: it unprecedentedly territorialized certain neighborhoods of Beirut. Whereas parts of Lebanon were organized by sects and classes, by relative contrast, it was according to political party affiliation that in 1957/1958 many Armenians of Mar Mikael, Sin el Fil, Bourj Hamoud, and Corniche el-Nahr were re-sorted and relocated, often by force. Lebanese Armenians aligned along the right-left fault lines that divided Lebanese politics and society— more than other confessions, indeed. Vice versa, the Lebanese state was Armenianized, as it were, in that it started to pay more attention to Armenian matters than before, intervening directly and by military force in Armenian neighborhoods in order to finally end the internecine Armenian confrontation.
第四章调查了亚美尼亚人在1957年选举以及1958年黎巴嫩“一般”内战和亚美尼亚内部小型内战中的立场。亚美尼亚各方参与并助长了黎巴嫩的政治紧张局势。与此同时，他们利用自己在黎巴嫩政治制度中的地位，在自己的社区内争夺权力- -这一事态发展演变成暴力，直到1958年12月，即黎巴嫩小型内战结束近两个月后才结束。亚美尼亚各方及其武装人员之间的紧张局势和暴力对抗在空间上产生了重要影响:它使贝鲁特的某些街区空前地成为领土。相对而言，黎巴嫩部分地区是按教派和阶级组织起来的，而1957/1958年，许多Mar Mikael、Sin el Fil、Bourj Hamoud和Corniche el- nahr的亚美尼亚人则是按政党关系重新分类和重新安置的，往往是用武力。黎巴嫩亚美尼亚人沿着左右分裂黎巴嫩政治和社会的断层线结盟，确实比其他忏悔更甚。反之亦然，黎巴嫩国家被亚美尼亚化，因为它开始比以前更注意亚美尼亚事务，直接以军事力量干预亚美尼亚社区，以便最终结束亚美尼亚人之间的相互残杀。
{"title":"Making Armenians Lebanese: The 1957 Election and the Ensuing 1958 Conflict","authors":"Tsolin Nalbantian","doi":"10.3366/edinburgh/9781474458566.003.0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9781474458566.003.0005","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 4 investigates Armenians’ stance in the 1957 elections and in the ‘general’ Lebanese and the intra-Armenian mini-civil war of 1958. Armenian parties participated in, and contributed to, political tensions in Lebanon. Simultaneously, they used their position in the Lebanese political system to jostle for power within their own community – a development that turned violent and ended only in December 1958, almost two months after the Lebanese mini-civil war had ended. This tension and violent confrontation between Armenian parties and their armed men had a crucial spatial effect: it unprecedentedly territorialized certain neighborhoods of Beirut. Whereas parts of Lebanon were organized by sects and classes, by relative contrast, it was according to political party affiliation that in 1957/1958 many Armenians of Mar Mikael, Sin el Fil, Bourj Hamoud, and Corniche el-Nahr were re-sorted and relocated, often by force.\u0000Lebanese Armenians aligned along the right-left fault lines that divided Lebanese politics and society— more than other confessions, indeed. Vice versa, the Lebanese state was Armenianized, as it were, in that it started to pay more attention to Armenian matters than before, intervening directly and by military force in Armenian neighborhoods in order to finally end the internecine Armenian confrontation.","PeriodicalId":120034,"journal":{"name":"Armenians Beyond Diaspora","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130838505","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-01DOI: 10.3366/edinburgh/9781474458566.003.0003
Tsolin Nalbantian
Chapter 2 deals with the 1946-1949 Soviet repatriation drive to collect all worldwide Armenians and “return” them to the ASSR and, specifically, the Lebanese Armenian political-cultural understandings of it. I explore how that initiative formed a chapter of Lebanese (and other Middle Eastern) Armenians’ renegotiation of national belonging in early post-colonial times. And although about a third of all Armenian repatriates travelled via Beirut, I also look at those who remained in Lebanon and in other countries in the Middle East. The emerging Cold War was more than a backdrop to this story. Heating up, the Cold War – and the very divergent readings of, and responses to, the repatriation initiative among Lebanese Armenians – reinforced tensions between Armenian rightists and leftists. Armenians’ response to repatriation did not simply reflect their extant political-cultural positions. Rather, repatriation sharpened those positions. Responses to repatriation echoed issues on the changing Lebanese/Syrian/Armenian identity complex at the dawn of the post-colonial nation-state. The responses to repatriation included a retelling and a reconstitution of the history of the tragedy of the genocide. They also automatically triggered questions about the location and nature of the Armenian homeland, adding fuel to the division between Dashnaks and Armenian leftists.
{"title":"The Homeland Debate, Redux: The Political–Cultural Impact of the 1946–1949 Repatriation to Soviet Armenia","authors":"Tsolin Nalbantian","doi":"10.3366/edinburgh/9781474458566.003.0003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9781474458566.003.0003","url":null,"abstract":"Chapter 2 deals with the 1946-1949 Soviet repatriation drive to collect all worldwide Armenians and “return” them to the ASSR and, specifically, the Lebanese Armenian political-cultural understandings of it. I explore how that initiative formed a chapter of Lebanese (and other Middle Eastern) Armenians’ renegotiation of national belonging in early post-colonial times. And although about a third of all Armenian repatriates travelled via Beirut, I also look at those who remained in Lebanon and in other countries in the Middle East. The emerging Cold War was more than a backdrop to this story. Heating up, the Cold War – and the very divergent readings of, and responses to, the repatriation initiative among Lebanese Armenians – reinforced tensions between Armenian rightists and leftists. Armenians’ response to repatriation did not simply reflect their extant political-cultural positions. Rather, repatriation sharpened those positions.\u0000Responses to repatriation echoed issues on the changing Lebanese/Syrian/Armenian identity complex at the dawn of the post-colonial nation-state. The responses to repatriation included a retelling and a reconstitution of the history of the tragedy of the genocide. They also automatically triggered questions about the location and nature of the Armenian homeland, adding fuel to the division between Dashnaks and Armenian leftists.","PeriodicalId":120034,"journal":{"name":"Armenians Beyond Diaspora","volume":"542 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134166956","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：