Armenian Refugees and Displaced Persons and the Birth of Armenian Social Work

This article was downloaded by: [Universidad de Sevilla]On: 02 December 2014, At: 03:34Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Journal of Immigrant &Refugee ServicesPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wzir20

Armenian Refugees andDisplaced Persons and the Birthof Armenian Social WorkNancy A. Humphreys DSW, ACSW a & LudmilaHaroutunian ba Institute for the Advancement of Political SocialWork Practice , University of Connecticut School ofSocial Work , USAb Department of Sociology, Social Work andConflictology , Yerevan State University , Republicof ArmeniaPublished online: 13 Nov 2009.

To cite this article: Nancy A. Humphreys DSW, ACSW & Ludmila Haroutunian (2004)Armenian Refugees and Displaced Persons and the Birth of Armenian Social Work,Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Services, 2:1-2, 31-48, DOI: 10.1300/J191v02n01_03

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J191v02n01_03

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wzir20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1300/J191v02n01_03

http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J191v02n01_03

losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Armenian Refugeesand Displaced Persons

and the Birth of Armenian Social Work

Nancy A. HumphreysLudmila Haroutunian

SUMMARY. This article explores the historical and recent patterns ofArmenian emigration and immigration and the impact that the popula-tion shifts have had and are having. The interconnections between peo-ples’ homeland and new land and the intersection among institutions inthe homeland and new land are illustrated. The development of socialwork as a profession along with a variety of non-governmental organiza-tions in Armenia developed through a unique collaboration between aschool of social work in the United States and the major university in Ar-menia is discussed and illustrated. [Article copies available for a fee fromThe Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address:<[email protected]> Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com> © 2004by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]

Nancy A. Humphreys, DSW, ACSW, is Professor and Director, Institute for theAdvancement of Political Social Work Practice, University of Connecticut School ofSocial Work.

Ludmila Haroutunian is Chair, Department of Sociology, Social Work and Conflict-ology, Yerevan State University, Republic of Armenia.

[Haworth co-indexing entry note]: “Armenian Refugees and Displaced Persons and the Birth of Arme-nian Social Work.” Humphreys, Nancy A., and Ludmila Haroutunian. Co-published simultaneously in Jour-nal of Immigrant & Refugee Services (The Haworth Social Work Practice Press, an imprint of The HaworthPress, Inc.) Vol. 2, No. 1/2, 2004, pp. 31-48; and: Immigrants and Social Work: Thinking Beyond the Bordersof the United States (ed: Diane Drachman, and Ana Paulino) The Haworth Social Work Practice Press, an im-print of The Haworth Press, Inc., 2004, pp. 31-48. Single or multiple copies of this article are available for afee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service [1-800-HAWORTH, 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (EST). E-mailaddress: [email protected]].

http://www.haworthpress.com/web/JIRS 2004 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

Digital Object Identifier: 10.1300/J191v02n01_03 31

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

KEYWORDS. Armenia, Armenian diaspora, refugees, displaced persons,nongovernmental organizations, Armenian social work

INTRODUCTION

The Armenian people have been defined, both in ancient and moderntimes, by complex patterns of migration. At the beginning of the 21stCentury it is estimated that there are six million Armenians world-wide.The first official census since Armenia became an independent republicwas conducted in October of 2000. However, complete results and anal-ysis are not expected until late 2003 (Gareginian, 11/2001 AIM). Thelast official counting of the population, while the country was still a partof the Soviet Union in 1989, put the country’s population at more thanthree million residents. The accuracy of this number is suspect, giventhe disorganization and lack of resources associated with the final daysof the Soviet Union. In addition, a large number of Armenians live out-side the country. Approximately half of all Armenians live in the worldwide diaspora . A large number of Armenians live in France, Syria, Iran,Israel and other countries in the Middle East. Approximately one mil-lion Armenians live in the United States. The Armenians living in thediaspora have and continue to play an important role in the maintenanceof Armenia and Armenian culture. The story of migration to and fromArmenia includes a fierce loyalty that most Armenians share in theircollective ethnic history and culture.

The purpose of this article is to explore historical and recent patternsof Armenian emigration and immigration. Discussion includes the sig-nificant impact these population shifts have had and are having on theculture, the people, and the country of Armenia. The emergence of so-cial work and a school of social work in Armenia that derives in partfrom the contributions of Armenian immigrants in the diaspora is de-scribed. The presentation also illustrates the interconnection betweenpeople’s homeland and new land and the interaction among institutionsin the homeland and new land that emerges out of migration.

The territory now occupied by Armenia has been at the cross road, andsometimes the actual battlefield, of many political and religious strug-gles throughout history continuing to current times. As a result, the coun-try’s political borders have changed many times while the culture andethnic identity have remained stable surviving both conquest and offi-cial efforts to diminish the Armenian culture or eliminate Armenians asa distinct people. The repeated political struggles over territory lead to

32 IMMIGRANTS AND SOCIAL WORK

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

large numbers of Armenian being displaced and complex patterns ofmigration.

Armenia today is a newly independent small landlocked Christiancountry in the southern Caucasus region. It became a free and independ-ent country in 1991 with the break up of the Soviet Union. The newly in-dependent and free republic represents only the most recent represen-tation of Armenia. Armenians trace their unique culture, if not discreteterritory, to the 6th century B.C. It is the oldest continuous Christiancountry in the world. The advent of the 21st century marks the 1700thanniversary of the Armenian Christian Church which has survived andserved as the keeper of the Armenian culture and language even duringSoviet times, when the celebration of religion and separate ethnic andculture identities were officially forbidden.

Armenian migration patterns have been and continue to be complex.The first large scale genocide of the 20th century began with the massa-cre and displacement of more than a million and a half Armenians in aland grab by the Ottoman Empire from an area, then known as WesternArmenia. While the world stood by, largely silent, more than a millionand a half Armenians were forced to flee their homes, perhaps as manyas a million were murdered. The massacre and removal of Armeniansrepresents the first of the major attempts at the genocide of a people thathas defined the 20th century. During World War II when the ThirdReich was contemplating the “final solution” of the “Jewish question,”Hitler, when asked if he thought the world would tolerate such system-atic genocide, asked, “Who remembers the Armenians?” While no spe-cific source has been found for this remark, it is widely repeated. Someargue that it might be apocryphal (Balakian, 1997). This effort to dis-place ethnic Armenians from territory they had lived on for centurieswas the first example of what would later come to be known as “ethniccleansing.”

ARMENIAN DIASPORA

The Armenians who fled the genocide formed the first generation ofrefugees in the diaspora which has played a continuing and importantrole in the life of Armenia and the Armenian people. Many of those whofled became well established and assimilated in their new countries.However, they never lost, at least not completely, their attachment toand identification with the Armenian territory as well as its rich and longcultural traditions. In some cases this identity may have been little more

Nancy A. Humphreys and Ludmila Haroutunian 33

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

than the continuation of distinct surnames, the familiar “ian” which be-came a symbol of Armenian ethnicity in English speaking countries.Despite the repeated efforts, by many different groups and governments,to annihilate or force their assimilation, Armenians have, in the main,remained a clearly identified ethnic group with their own culture. Thishas been equally true for those in the geographic homeland as well asthose in the world-wide diaspora. The world famous poet and Armenianfolk hero William Saroyan portrays Armenian ethnic identity as he writes:

I should like to see any power in this world destroy this race, thissmall tribe of unimportant people whose history is ended, whosewars have been fought and lost, whose structures have crumbled,whose literature is unread, whose music is unheard and whose pray-ers are no more answered. Go ahead, destroy this! Destroy Arme-nia! See if you can do it. Send them from their homes into thedesert. Let them have neither bread nor water. Burn their homesand churches. Then see if they will not laugh again, see if they willnot sing and pray again. For when two of them meet anywhere inthe world, see if they will not create a New Armenia. (Quoted in Elek-tron)

Nowhere were the efforts to extinguish the Armenian culture moreprevalent than in the policies of the former Soviet Union which sub-jected separate cultural and ethnic identities to rigid central authority.One of the official policies of the Soviet Union, particularly harshly im-posed during the reign of Joseph Stalin, resulted in the wholesale up-rooting and relocation of members of one ethnic group into the territoryof another. The official purpose of this policy was to make ethnic iden-tity hard to maintain and allegiance to central authority more likely. Asa result of this policy many Armenians were forcibly resettled to otherregions throughout the Soviet Union. A large number of Armenians wererelocated to neighboring Azerbaijan, a Muslim country with longstand-ing ethnic hostilities toward their Christian Armenian neighbors. Therelocated Armenians were settled in a territory which came to be knownas Nagorno Karabakh.

POST SOVIET ERA

During the time of the break up of the Soviet Union, the ethnic Arme-nians in the Karabakh demanded the right to become an independent


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

country or as an alternative to become a part of Armenia. The govern-ment of Azerbaijan refused and war erupted between the Karabakh andAzerbaijan. Later the hostilities were actively supported by the newlyindependent Republic of Armenia. After years of intense fighting andescalating hostilities, a cease fire was agreed to in 1994. The future of thisdisputed territory, as well as sizeable areas of Azerbaijan which came un-der Armenian occupation and control during the war, await final settle-ment.

The war and its aftermath affected Armenia (and Azerbaijan) in manyways. During the period of hostilities large numbers of residents on bothsides of the border were unable to remain in their homes due to frequentand persistent shelling. Many residents fled their homes and moved tosafer more protected areas of their respective countries. Some of the Ar-menians chose to leave the Karabakh and became residents in Armenianterritory, a population shift fully sanctioned by the newly formed nationalgovernment in Armenia. During the years when the war was most in-tense, Armenia was subjected to a total blockade of its borders with thetechnical exception of Georgia to the north. Turkey and Iran, both Mus-lim countries and strong supporters of Azerbaijan, refused to allow anypeople or goods to move through its borders. Even the airspace was for-bidden to Armenian air traffic. While the border with Georgia remainedopen most of the time and air traffic was permitted through its airspace,it was beset by its own internal civil war which made the border danger-ous and the movement of goods and services unpredictable. In the earlyyears of the Republic, the only outside source of energy was a gas linethat ran through Georgia. The line was cut or sabotaged as often as it wasin operation. During these years, Armenia suffered severe energy short-ages and draconian rationing which made everyday life extremely diffi-cult.

Armenians throughout the diaspora, most especially Armenian-Americans, were instrumental in helping the new country through con-tributions of humanitarian assistance and putting political pressure toforce neighboring governments, especially Turkey who has strong tiesto the West to open its borders and enable goods and services to moveinto Armenia. Lifting the blockade, which happened in 1995, requiredthe intervention of and leverage by the United States using the threat ofthe loss of foreign aid to Turkey unless the blockade was lifted (H.R.1868, 1995).

Another very difficult cost of the conflict was the forced expulsion ordecision to flee made by ethnic Armenians who lived in Azerbaijan, notthe Karabakh. Likewise, large numbers of ethnic Azerbaijanis were ex-


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

pelled or fled Armenia. In addition, Armenians living in other newly in-dependent countries of the former Soviet Union fearing ethnic-politicalconflicts also fled to Armenia. These fears were particularly keen for thoseArmenians who lived in countries where Islam was to become the domi-nant religion or where Muslims were the majority ethnic group. The fearof being persecuted played a significant role in the migration patternsamong all of the newly independent states. Most of those who fled theKarabakh, Azerbaijan or other former Soviet countries were pushed fromtheir homes and countries in which they were citizens. Like most refu-gees who are forced to leave they did so with great reservations. Accord-ing to State proclamations by the former Soviet Union, principles ofshared political citizenship and an integrated civil society, which re-spected the rights of all citizens equally were promoted. However, al-most all post-Soviet countries have been dominated by conflict betweenand among ethnic groups with minority groups feeling vulnerable. Theseventy year plus efforts of the USSR to reduce ethnic identification andcreate ethnically neutral social and political relationships failed. Todaymost of the newly formed states are organized along ethnic lines or reli-gious preferences.

In some instances the old ethnic tensions have broken out into war.Currently, the world community pays large sums of money to forciblykeep peace among groups that would otherwise be at war.

Between 1988 and 1992, 360,000 refugees arrived in Armenia fromAzerbaijan and Nagorno Karabakh. These people were refugees in ev-ery sense of the United Nations definition. They were forced to leavebecause of persecution. They were unable to remain or return to theirnative country and they sought the protection of the state to which theyfled (Van Wormer 1997). The most significant difference between theserefugees and others was that the vast majority of them were ethnic Ar-menians who had never lived or visited the country. The newly inde-pendent republic lacked resources to meet the needs of the new arrivalsas well as those of its own citizens. In addition, the “State” was unableto provide sufficient economic opportunities for people to work andearn a living because of the quick change from the Soviet economic sys-tem that guaranteed jobs for all to a system based on free market princi-ples where individuals and families are responsible for themselves. Thechange in government and in the economic system associated with thebreak-up of the Soviet Union resulted in major social and economicproblems. Unemployment, underemployment, rampant poverty and adramatic increase in crime and corruption occurred. As Midgely (1997)


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

notes the collapse of Communism brought serious reversals in the qual-ity of life for ordinary citizens.

During the arrival of the greatest number of refugees, Armenia expe-rienced a devastating earthquake in heavily populated areas of the north-eastern part of the country. Twenty-five thousand persons died andmore than 300,000 were left homeless and without work. Promises weremade by the central government in Moscow that economic relief andnew housing would be provided. However, aid did not materialize dueto lack of resources. Local government also had few resources to ad-dress the overwhelming need. As a result, local Armenian authorities andthe Soviet government took the unprecedented step of making it easierfor outsiders, especially Armenians from the diaspora, to come to Ar-menia and help with relief efforts. Hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Ar-menians from the diaspora came to Armenia to help with the aftermathof the effects of the earthquake. For many, this marked their first timevisiting Armenia. Despite never having been there, the nation and thepeople of Armenia had been kept alive through the stories and the strug-gles told to them by their parents and grandparents. Many of the ethnicArmenians in the diaspora contributed concrete assistance and materialaid to extended family and strangers. Large amounts of economic aidand humanitarian relief, much of it from Armenian Americans flowedinto the country as a result of the government’s new openness to outsidehelp and relaxed trade and travel restrictions.

The Armenians from the diaspora have become a critical economicresource to the new Republic. Large sums of humanitarian aid now reg-ularly flow into the country and many Armenians in the diaspora regu-larly send money to relatives, often family they have never met giventhe rigidity of the earlier Soviet travel restrictions. Voluntary assistancefrom extended family members in the diaspora makes up a significantproportion of family income and a significant part of the country’s grossdomestic product. The Armenian Assembly of America, a major orga-nization that represents the interests of Armenia and Armenians livingin the United States, places the current gross domestic product (GDP) ofArmenia at 2.1 billion dollars of which 300 million dollars come fromthe diaspora. This means that almost one sixth of the Armenian (GDP)comes from the descendants of refugees throughout the diaspora. In ad-dition Armenians who send money to family also commonly participatein family decision making. Similarly, those who contribute humanitar-ian assistance to the country as a whole believe that they have a right andan obligation to pay attention and in some instances seek to influencethe internal social, political and economic system in the country.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

THE NEW REPUBLICAND THE INCREASE OF DISPLACED PERSONS

The serendipitous intersection of three cataclysmic events, the earth-quake, the break up of the Soviet Union and a significant influx of refu-gees dominated the early years of the new Republic. These events resul-ted in significant deprivation among a sizeable population, considerabledistrust of government, and social strife. Nowhere was this collision ofsocial forces more clear than in the escalating housing crisis. The arrivalof refugees and persons displaced by the earthquake made an alreadycritical housing shortage much worse. Refugees and earthquake victimsshared a similar status as internally displaced persons who lacked basicresources and few opportunities to remedy their deprivation (VanWormer, 1997). Their situation was made worse by the inability of thegovernment to plan for or meet the needs of internally displaced indi-viduals and families. The new Armenian government could not meetthe need for housing and outside humanitarian assistance could not keeppace with the escalating need for shelter. The needs of earthquake survi-vors and the refugee population were similar despite the fact that the ori-gin of their situation was different.

Because of the similarities between refugees and other groups of dis-placed persons, Ahearn (1995) argues that both groups could be includedin a single category of displaced persons. Both are forced to flee theirhomes and both groups are without basic resources. In contrast, Alaver-dyan (2001) argues for a more finite categorization of displaced persons.In respect to modern day Armenia, she divides displaced persons intobroad categories based on where they came from: (Azerbaijan, a borderarea, other former Soviet territory, or the diaspora); and how they cameto Armenia (were they deported, did they flee, were they forced out, ordid they leave voluntarily)? When using specific categorization, it isnecessary to place many persons in more than one category.

The finite categorization of displaced persons facilitates differentia-tion among the circumstances of refugees or immigrants and earthquakesurvivors. The differentiation makes it possible to argue for compensa-tion that would be appropriate for different groups of displaced persons.For example, many Armenians including many in the government, ar-gue that significant compensation should be forthcoming from the gov-ernment of Azerbaijan who, they claim is responsible for the dislocationof many of those who fled Azerbaijan. (Not surprising the governmentof Azerbaijan argues that Armenia should be responsible for paying forthe cost of those who fled from Armenia to Azerbaijan.) Distinguishing


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

those refugees who came from Azerbaijan from others who migrated toArmenia would be necessary in order to sustain the argument of govern-mental responsibility. The issue of reparations for those who lost theirhomes and possessions as a result of the war and official governmentalpolicies and actions remains to be settled in a final solution of the warbetween Armenian and Azerbaijan.

Activities associated with the movement of refugees, earthquake sur-vivors and other displaced persons and the governments responses canbe grouped into three distinct phases. During the first phase, the periodbetween 1988 and 1991, large numbers of refugees from Azerbaijanwere forced to flee to Armenia (and vice versa) in response to the war.Many residents in villages on the Armenian side of the border were alsoforced to flee to safer locations in response to the persistent shelling.During the same time the earthquake added hundreds of thousands ofsurvivors who were displaced from their homes and jobs as whole com-munities were left with no livable space and no economic infrastructureor activity.

Between 1992 and 1995, the middle phase in the movement of refu-gees and displaced persons, large numbers of refugees continued to ar-rive from Azerbaijan. At the same time a new group of refugees, spec-ifically Armenians who had been living in other areas of the SovietUnion, returned to Armenia out of fear for their safety. Many of thenewly independent republics in the former Soviet Union were strongsupporters of Azerbaijan and the ethnic Armenians who lived there fearedthat they might not be protected by the new governments. The govern-ment of Armenia welcomed Armenians to their cultural home as a sym-bol of the viability of the newly independent country. This policy alsoencouraged the migration of Armenians who had never lived in Arme-nia. They were returning to a shared culture and ethnic identification asa protection against common enemies both geographic and cultural.During this phase, there was also outmigration. Some Armenians leftthe country because they were afraid of their fate in the newly free coun-try. These Armenians had been supportive of the Soviet system and re-sisted independence. Other native Armenians took advantage of fairlyopen immigration policies in countries with large Armenian populations.They left because they viewed the social and political transition wouldbe difficult. Some joined family who had immigrated to other countriesin years past.

In 1995, the Law of Citizenship was passed. The law granted refu-gees the right to become citizens of Armenia. This marked the begin-ning of the third and current phase of refugee migration patterns into


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

and out of Armenia. The number of refugees from Azerbaijan and otherrepublics of the former Soviet Union decreased. However, the majorityof those who had arrived earlier remained in temporary overcrowdedhousing and in congested communities. Some lived in refugee settle-ments with access to few social or economic resources. Likewise, themajority of earthquake survivors continued to live in temporary arrange-ments. Their previous social experience with the government whichprovided for their basic needs led them to wait for an institution to im-prove their situation. Further outmigration also occurred during this phase.Thousands of skilled Armenians left to work in other countries, espe-cially Russia where economic opportunity was greater.

Throughout the three phases of migration activity, the refugees facedproblems in becoming integrated into the social order. The vast majorityof ethnic Armenians who fled Azerbaijan and other former Soviet re-publics came to Armenia for the first time. Many did not speak Arme-nian which had become the official language at the time of independ-ence. Since Russian was the language of instruction in all levels ofschools throughout the former Soviet Union, communication was pos-sible among the educated classes. However, as part of their new nationalidentity, speaking Russian was discouraged causing the new arrivals toexperience many problems which made them feel out of place. They ar-rived suspicious of authority and sometimes with the expectation thatthey should receive preferential treatment from their new country be-cause their suffering came as a result of their ethnicity. In most respects,they were foreigners despite their shared ethnic and cultural identities.In addition, most of those who fled to Armenia came with little morethan what they could carry as many had been displaced by armed sol-diers. The extent of their deprivation was great and post traumatic stressdisorder and related trauma reactions were common among the new ar-rivals.

In the early years of migration the usual stresses experienced by refu-gees were made worse by attempts on the part of the central Soviet gov-ernment to minimize the refugee problem and hide the refugees in orderto foster a belief in the outside world that social life was proceeding nor-mally and peacefully during the period of transition. Thus many of therefugees were hidden in government subsidized holiday hotels, vaca-tion houses, or other locations suitable to congregate housing such astemporary encampments or abandoned military or sports training facili-ties. These locations were in isolated areas away from population cen-ters and void of economic opportunity.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

THE DEVELOPMENTOF SOCIAL WORK AND THE CREATION

OF NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS (NGOS)

The newly formed Armenian government lacked the money to sup-port anything other than basic survival services for needy and displacedpersons and earthquake survivors. In response to the many problemsthat plagued the new country, resources poured in from the outsideworld, especially from the world wide diaspora. The outside resourceswere more than matched, at least in effort, by ordinary Armenians whohelped family members, neighbors and strangers alike and created newand completely novel mutual aid activities. Another important resourcewas the arrival of experts, again with many coming from the diaspora,who provided professional expertise. The arrival of experts in socialwork, mental health and other helping professions along with the col-laborative activities with persons and institutions in Armenia were in-strumental in the birth of social work and the creation of a flourishingcommunity of non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

One collaboration resulted in the development of a school of socialwork in Armenia. The collaboration was arranged by an American socialworker, a son of refugees who fled the Armenian genocide. He spent ayear in Armenia after the earthquake developing mental health servicesfor children in the earthquake zone. On a home visit to the United States(U.S.) in 1990 he contacted the University of Connecticut School of So-cial Work to propose a joint effort to develop western style social workin Armenia. This collaboration was facilitated by a number of factors,including a new program emphasis on international collaboration at theUniversity of Connecticut (UConn) and a general understanding of so-cial work among Yerevan State University (YSU) sociology faculty.The early phases of the newly formed collaboration were assisted by thefact that the head of the YSU Sociology Department had a diplomaticpassport, as a member of the Supreme Soviet, which enabled easytravel. The Armenian-American social worker arranged financial sup-port for travel back and forth between the United States and Armeniafrom a Swiss Foundation that supported work in the country. Central tothe success of this collaboration was very strong personal chemistry be-tween the principle collaborators from the very beginning.

A collaboration with a U.S. school of social work was deemed essen-tial by the Armenians as they understood that the social work professionwould be needed as Armenia moved from a centralized command and


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

control economic system to a free market economy. The collaborationbetween the two universities has been aided by the involvement of sev-eral projects supported by the European Union and led by the LondonSchool of Economics.

The collaboration has taken many forms. One important early activ-ity was UConn’s facilitation of a study tour for the head of the YSU so-ciology faculty where she was able to visit both public and private agencysocial service programs while also meeting and consulting with a num-ber of UConn faculty on the development of social work education pro-grams in Armenia. A similar study tour of social service agencies andprograms was later arranged for the then Minister of Labor and SocialWelfare in the first independently elected government in the new Re-public of Armenia. Throughout the collaboration there have been fre-quent visits and consultations among faculty from both universities.

Many educational resources and materials have been sent to Armeniawith the help of a prominent and wealthy member of the Armenian dias-pora in the United States who pays for shipping a variety of materials tothe country. To date more than 30,000 books and journals have beensent to Armenia. These materials have enabled faculty to create a sepa-rate specialized social work library for students and faculty. These ma-terials were useful since the faculty and many of the students becameEnglish-reading. They were gathered from retiring social work practi-tioners and faculty in the United States. Through these donations com-plete collections of the major U.S. professional social work journals,texts and books have been made available. As the program expandedand educational sites were developed in other parts of the country librar-ies in these places have also received a number of books and publica-tions. Films, videos and audio tapes and the equipment to play themhave been sent along with study guides to aid in the training and educat-ing of social workers in Armenia.

The YSU faculty moved quickly to develop social work educationand training programs in order to get as many people as possible pre-pared to help people who were caught up in the dramatic economic tran-sition that followed independence from the former Soviet Union. Thefirst programs involved a series of six month training programs intendedto give those trained enough knowledge and beginning skills to enablethem to help individual, groups and communities and develop programsto cope with the high rates of unemployment, underemployment andpoverty that immediately followed the conversion to a free marketeconomy. These short term training programs were tailored for govern-ment and NGO employees and others who were to become the first gen-


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

eration of trained social service workers in Armenia. The training con-centrated on helping techniques and emphasized a combination of class-room instruction with field work training.

Following the completion and evaluation of the training programsthe YSU faculty introduced a five year undergraduate degree in socialwork to be pursued by sociology majors. Eventually the department ofsociology was re-named to include social work and social work becamea separate major. Shortly after the implementation of the new social workprogram the university as a whole, following the pattern typical in theWest, decided to move from five year to four year undergraduate degreeprograms. After graduating two cohorts of undergraduate social workmajors, the faculty with encouragement of YSU administrators createda one year Masters in Social Work Program. The program was open tograduates of the undergraduate program only. Thus a total of five yearsconsisting of undergraduate and graduate programs became the highestlevel of social work training available. UConn faculty and staff offeredconsultations on course development and curriculum organization andgathered teaching and learning resources to augment didactic teaching.

The “Social Work” faculty were in reality trained sociologists, most ofwhom had PhDs, but had no actual social work experience. Throughoutthe collaboration, UConn faculty struggled to find ways to help the Arme-nians understand the role of practical training in the preparation of studentsin applied professional education programs. The value of practice-basedtraining in social work was aided tremendously by the hands on availabilityof the Armenian American social worker, the initiator of the original col-laboration, who was in the country frequently for extended time. While inArmenia he identified and developed a number of U.S. type field work ed-ucation sites for YSU social work students. In addition he worked with fac-ulty to understand the importance of field work education and its role inmaking the program a success. To help everyone involved in the field edu-cation process understand their important roles he wrote and translated afield work manual for faculty, field work instructors and students. Themanual explained and illustrated the field work education process. Theavailability of an on-site experienced social work practitioner knowledge-able in the language and culture was an essential component of the successof this project.

Initially the sociology faculty and others in the university were un-convinced of the value of practical training as an appropriate responsi-bility of a university and some wondered if such programs were moreappropriate to a non-university setting. The UConn collaborators ar-gued the value of university-based professional education and eventu-


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

ally were persuasive. More recently, YSU administrators told theauthors that the model of practical training and international collabora-tion demonstrated by the Sociology and Social Work Departmentshould be followed by other departments (Personal Communication,2002). The Armenian University hopes that future collaboration withUConn will be broadened to other academic departments and disci-plines.

While the social work education programs grew at the university, so-cial service programs, both government programs and NGOs, flour-ished in the first decade of the new country’s existence. Interestingly,social work in Armenia has developed along a similar path as happenedin the United States one hundred years ago. For example, social workershave become part of many of the Armenian hospitals and schools just ashappened in the U.S. In addition, a number of specialized communitybased social service NGOs have become a regular part of the landscapeof resources in the new country. Several of the YSU faculty have foundedand continue to provide leadership to a number of interesting and inno-vative social service NGOs. In this way the faculty are learning firsthand about social work practice. Adding social service programs has beendifficult since there is little money for new initiatives and still some mis-understanding among the general public about the value of professionalhelping services. Nonetheless, new programs are proliferating and thevariety and quality of these programs are impressive. Many of theseprograms are supported by charitable donations from the diaspora andothers interested in stabilizing the new republic through the introduc-tion of an infrastructure of a civil society. Relatively small charitablecontributions from the diaspora can support whole programs. While thecost of living has climbed significantly, salaries have not risen any-where near as fast so a relatively small sum can support a number of staff.For example, a contribution of $250 can support a program for pregnantwomen that includes several staff for one month.

A variety of professional, self help and mutual aid activities emergedin the new Republic of Armenia. Many of these assisted refugees, earth-quake survivors and others who had been displaced in the new econ-omy. Often refugees, survivors and displaced persons banded togetherin formal and informal organizations to advocate for and protect theirown interests. Currently, there are more than forty NGOs involved inrefugee support and advocacy activities in Armenia (Alaverdyan,2000). Some of the new NGOs were local branches of internationalorganizations which were financially supported by outsiders. Much ofthis generosity came from the world wide diaspora. Some NGOs served all


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

groups while others concentrated their resources on refugees, earthquakesurvivors or other displaced groups. In addition to direct services, NGOsalso engaged in a variety of community development strategies to createservices that would meet current and future needs. Still other NGOsconcentrated on local and national educational services that informedthe population, including government, of the needs and views of spe-cific groups. Collectively the newly formed NGOs have played an im-portant part in providing services, in promoting understanding and humanetreatment of the population, and building the necessary infra-structureof a modern civil society. The NGOs have also had an important role inthe development of social work in Armenia.

The development of government and NGO social service programsand the social work profession have grown together, and, in fact, are in-terdependent. More service programs created job opportunities for moresocial workers. Although not all of the new social workers were formallyeducated, some were trained in one or more short term training pro-grams while others just began working with people. Currently Arme-nian social work is a mix of formally educated, trained and untrainedpractitioners. In an effort to increase the professionalism of social workthe faculty initiated the first professional association. The Armenian So-ciety of Social Scientists was founded by the sociology and social workfaculties. The Armenian Association of Social Workers is a division with-in the larger Society. The professional association was created in orderto advance the professionalism of social work. In addition to encourag-ing the formation of the social work association, the UConn has helpedthe larger association found a professional and scholarly journal SocialTransitions. A UConn social work faculty member serves on the edito-rial review board. Several U.S. faculty have published in the new jour-nal. Some financial support for the journal has been arranged throughthe collaboration. The UConn faculty hope that the social work associa-tion will soon turn its attention to the creation of the first code of ethicsfor social work in Armenia. An important aspect of the collaboration inthe development of social work has been to insure that the professiondevelops in a way that is compatible with the Armenian culture. Culturalrelevance is particularly important when thinking about values and eth-ics.

One of the most exciting elements of the collaboration has beenfunded travel opportunities for selected UConn MSW students whospend their spring break in Armenia working on projects in support ofthe development of social work. To date ten UConn students have trav-eled to Armenia. In 2000 two Armenian American students from UConn


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

traveled to Armenia as a part of their field placement. Both were part ofthe diaspora. One of them had been raised in the Armenian culture. Theother had an Armenian “ian” name but knew little else about her culturalheritage. Both returned from what they described as a life-altering expe-rience. They worked on two projects. The first involved the develop-ment of a 50 minute video–Beginning Where the Soviet Ends: The Storyof the Development of Social Work in Armenia. The video has had widecirculation in social work education and among the diaspora. The sec-ond project involved a series of eight focus groups with various sub-groups of women in a Soviet-style planned community outside the capi-tal city. The purpose of the focus groups was to understand the women’ssocial service needs and to help women face the many problems associ-ated with the dramatic transition in government and the economy whichcame as a result of the break up of the Soviet Union. The focus groups’data were analyzed and shared with local officials and published in So-cial Transitions (Humphreys and Simonian 2002).

The focus group method proved to be a particularly valid approach forcapturing the experiences of women in Armenia, a group most affectedby the dramatic transformations that occurred in the country. Women inArmenia have felt the brunt of the social, political and economic trans-formations that have taken place since Armenia became independent.

Like women everywhere, women in Armenia are the “rescuers of thefamily” since they are often the only adults in communities while menare away fighting wars or earning money (Van Wormer 1997).

Saulnier (1996) argues that “structural adjustment,” the term she usesto refer to the movement from a planned central economy to one that is afree market system, affects women especially hard since they are theones responsible for ensuring that families get along on whatever re-sources are available. The experiences of women are an important win-dow into the well being of a society. The data from the focus groups tellan important story about the transitions in Armenia, particularly theireffects on women and children as well as showing how women are cop-ing and ultimately surviving in their new world.

The findings were many and important. None were more important thanthe finding that most of the participants were now living as single-parentmother-headed families because the husband/fathers were economicrefugees, having left the community or country to find work in other ar-eas. The most disturbing fact about this growing phenomenon is thatsome of the single parents had learned that their absent husbands wereforming new families in their new place of residence. Thus, the loss ofeconomic opportunity resulted in a dramatic growth in single-parent


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

mother-headed families. The long term impact of these social changes arenot yet well understood.

None of the other student travelers were of Armenian descent and yetthey all experienced what they described as very significant experiences.Students have completed evaluations of several newly created social ser-vice programs, consulted with community leaders about new social ser-vice activities, visited and worked in refugee programs, met with studentsand faculty to exchange teaching and learning ideas and evaluated thetechnology capacity that could facilitate future collaborations. In manyinstances the U.S. students have maintained contact with those they metin Armenia. The collaboration between the two universities and socialwork faculties has been advanced and made richer by student experi-ences. A future hope of the collaboration is that sufficient funding can befound to support true international student exchanges with students fromboth programs regularly traveling to the other country.

In 2003, the authors initiated an innovative joint teaching assign-ment. Seven UConn and eleven YSU social work students completed acourse titled “Social Work and Social Welfare in the Second World.” Thecourse was taught using Web CT an electronic classroom that includesan e-mail and chat room features. The course was a comparative socialwelfare policy analysis with an emphasis on the context and substanceof social welfare policy in Armenia and selected other newly independ-ent republics formerly part of the Soviet Union. Working in cross na-tional teams using Web CT students completed comparative policy analy-sis in three countries, Armenia, United States and one other country inthe former Soviet Union. The course was carefully evaluated. Not sur-prising the major difficulties were unequal access to computers and theinternet and language difficulties. Despite these difficulties the coursewill be taught again in the near future.

CONCLUSION

The development of social work and NGOs in Armenia have beeninfluenced greatly by the needs of refugee populations and other per-sons who have been displaced by the new social and economic system.While the emerging patterns in Armenia are unique to its particularculture and time, it is interesting that the pattern in Armenia closelyfollows what happened in the United States more than one hundredyears ago. In a similar way, the development of social work in Arme-nia replicated what happened in the United States, specifically the hir-


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

ing of individual social workers to work in existing social institutionssuch as schools and hospitals and the evolution of the profession inthese fields of practice. These developments occurred naturally andwere not the result of any systematic plan or consultation with interna-tional collaborators.

While Armenian migration patterns have been similar to other coun-tries in its link to social work and the creation of NGOs, they were uniquebecause of the role that Armenians in the world wide diaspora haveplayed in the affairs of the country both while it was a part of the SovietUnion and more recently after it became an independent country. The ad-vent of social work as a profession and NGOs have occurred in many ofthe other newly independent countries of the former Soviet Union. How-ever, the power and role of the Armenian diaspora has uniquely contrib-uted to both the emergence of a free and independent Armenia and thedevelopment of social work as a new profession in the new republic.

Finally, the particular nature and forms of the collaboration with oneschool of social work in the United States and the newly created socialwork program in Armenia has many features which could serve as a modelfor others who wish to become involved in cross national collaboration.

REFERENCES

Ahearn, F.L. (1995). Displaced people. In Richard L. Edwards (Ed.) Encyclopedia ofSocial Work–19th edition. Washington, DC: NASW.

Alaverdyan, L. (2001). The problem of refugees and poverty reduction strategy in Ar-menia. www.worldbank.org/wbil/devdebates/ecal/alaveryan.pdf.

Balakian, P. (1997). Black dog of fate: An American son uncovers his Armenian past.New York: Broadway Books.

Davis, L. & Hagen, J. L. (1996). Stereotypes and stigma: What’s changed for welfaremothers? Affilia, 11(3), 319-337.

Davis, L. & Srinivasan, M. (1995). Listening the to the voices of battered women:What helps them escape violence? Affilia, 10(1), 49-69.

Elektron.ettudeft.nl/~edo/armhist.htmlGareginian, A. (11/2001) AIM. (Armenian International Magazine), pp. 22-23.Humanitarian Aid Corridor Act, HR1868, 104th Cong. (1995).Humphreys, N.A. & Simonian, J. (2002) Women’s voices from an artificial village.

Armenian Women, 1(2).Midgley, J. (1997). Social welfare in global context. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Roche, S. E. (1996). Messages from the NGO Forum on Women in Beijing 1995.

Affilia, 11(4), 484-494.Saulnier, C. F. (1996). Feminist theories and social work: Approaches and applica-

tions. New York: The Haworth Press.Urwin, C. A. & Haynes, D. T. (1998). A reflexive model for collaboration: Empower-

ing partnerships through focus groups. Administration in Social Work, 22(2), 23-39.Van Wormer, K. (1997) Social welfare: A world view. Chicago: Nelson-Hall Publish-

ers.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

idad

de

Sevi

lla]

at 0

3:34

02

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Documents

Armenian Refugees and Displaced Persons and the Birth of Armenian Social Work