Last week the National Assembly began discussing the dual citizenship legislation. As expected, the main debate was on the right to vote or get elected of Armenian citizens who are also dual citizens.
According to Armenian Justice Minister David Harutyunyan, based on the worry that people who have never lived in Armenia may have an influence on the electoral processes in Armenia, there are some reform proposals being made in the Electoral Code. One of the principles of those reforms is that only Armenian citizens with dual citizenship that will be in Armenia on Election Day may participate in the elections.
It’s clear that providing dual citizens with the right to participate in the elections is directly tied to the autonomy of Armenia. In that sense, ARF representative and National Assembly vice-speaker Vahan Hovhannisyan recently announced during discussions at the National Assembly:
“If the 3 million people living in Armenia are that indifferent towards the future to have it be determined from abroad, then it must be determined abroad.”
Let’s leave aside the numerous issues concerning the rights and responsibilities of dual citizens and try to understand what issue the Armenian government wants to solve by having the approval of the dual citizenship law serve as a means for that? Is the solution to that problem really that important to sacrifice or put Armenia’s autonomy in jeopardy? Is the approval of the dual citizenship law really the only way to solve the assumed problem? So, what is the issue we are trying to solve by approving dual citizenship? We directed this question to advocate of the approval of the dual citizenship law and ARF representative Gegham Manukyan.
“After its re-independence, the Armenian people declared the main propositions by which they are going to develop, grow and dual citizenship is one of those propositions,” said G. Manukyan and added that in the declaration of independence, Armenia “mentioned the rights of all its compatriots”. According to G. Manukyan, dual citizenship is “driven by the people’s destiny and biography”.
“The people of Armenia, who have been split and are in the current situation as a result of fate and genocide, are doing away with the injustice that an entire nation had seen with the approval of the dual citizenship norm,” said G. Manukyan.
As you can see, the need for approving dual citizenship is explained by sentimental approaches. True, Mr. Manukyan also expressed his opinion that in times like these, the dual citizenship norm has turned into “one of the main propositions of integration and globalization and, obviously, Armenia couldn’t have been left behind in that process.” However, this uncertain and mixed-up wording still isn’t aimed to show that the need to approve dual citizenship is only explained by sentimental wordings, although there is nothing to be surprised about. Armenia’s foreign policy has been built on sentimentality for a while now. It’s surprising to see that despite the downfalls, Armenians still continue to “build” the state based on sentimentality.
The Dashnaks declare that Armenia is the homeland of all Armenians and that’s why it is necessary to approve dual citizenship which, according to them, the nation split after genocide will unite, the Armenian Diaspora will show more active participation in the construction of our country, etc. It’s self-explanatory that the attempts to morally bribe Armenian Diasporans with similar laws can’t make them increase the amounts of investments in Armenia. We shouldn’t take steps at the moral level, but rather they should be more concrete, perspective and practical. We have to take steps which will instill trust in everyone, including the Armenians from the Diaspora, to let them know that the money they invest in Armenia doesn’t go to waste, that the amounts will multiply and will bring them certain profit. National belonging or the possession of an Armenian passport can’t motivate the person to make investments in Armenia. Let’s not forget that Armenia has the status certificate system functioning for a while now and the foreigners living in Armenia with the status certificate have all the rights (excluding the voting right) that Armenian citizens have. In this case, if Armenia approves dual citizenship, but we don’t grant dual citizens the electoral right, the approval of a similar dual citizenship law becomes extra. To grant the electoral right to dual citizens means to sacrifice Armenia’s independence, which the ARF was against.
It is worth mentioning that the head of the National Assembly International Relations committee who is extremely worried over the fate of the Armenians around the world is ARF representative Armen Rustamyan. But that committee doesn’t respond when Armenian citizens are murdered in this or that country, especially in Russia. This means that that committee, as well as other government officials, are not in the least interested in the destinies of the Armenian citizens and the approval of the dual citizenship law will increase the range of people who don’t care about the fate of Armenia. What’s also disappointing is that the Armenian Republican Party, which is against granting dual citizens the electoral right, explains its position by bringing up mere sentimental arguments. In particular, the Republicans announce: how correct is it to have the people who lived through the “dark and cold years” and felt the sufferings on their skins to be equal to the people who left Armenia during those years?
It’s clear that after a couple of decades, there will no longer be Armenians who have lived thorugh “dark and cold years” and that’s when, according to the logic of the Republicans, nothing will stand in the way of granting dual citizens the electoral right. So, the Dashnaks and Republicans don’t differ in their positions on this issue. It turns out that after selling everything in the country, now we have began creating legal grounds for selling the independence of the state by means of passports with the goal of “uniting the nation”.