Armenian Positive Neutrality in Lebanon: Continuity and Change

This article examines the evolution of Armenian positive neutrality in Lebanon, tracing its historical roots and outlining its impact during the Lebanese Civil War and subsequent conflicts. It highlights a transition from traditional non-engagement to a more proactive participation stance amidst changing political landscapes, while emphasizing the community’s commitment to cultural identity and stability.

The Armenian community in Lebanon has historically adopted a policy of positive neutrality, which provided a framework for maintaining dialogue and stability during the Lebanese Civil War. This policy was motivated by the Armenian community’s commitment to the sovereignty of Lebanon, despite internal ideological differences among its political parties—Tashnak, Hunchak, and Ramgavar—who united to protect communal interests during the turmoil.

Armenian neutrality has origins linked to the 1915 Armenian Genocide, leading to the establishment of a community focused on security and non-involvement in inter-sectarian conflicts. This was particularly evident during the Civil War, where Armenian political entities emphasized maintaining cultural identity while avoiding alignment with violent factions. Instead of engaging in battles, local militias prioritized the defense of predominantly Armenian areas such as Bourj Hammoud and Anjar.

Following the Civil War, the focus of Armenian political affiliation shifted toward pragmatism. Although tensions arose after the 2005 assassination of Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, which polarized Lebanese politics, the Armenian community managed to maintain a balanced presence in government. To safeguard their interests, Armenian groups emphasized collaboration among political parties while fostering cultural and educational institutions to uphold their identity.

Recent shifts, including the Syrian Civil War and a significant economic downturn, have tested Armenian neutrality once more. The influx of Syrian Armenian refugees and the social-political decline have forced community leaders to reconsider their traditional stance on neutrality amid escalating tensions. The August 2020 Beirut Port explosion further complicated the landscape, with humanitarian aid reflecting communal priorities over political affiliations.

Current challenges to Armenian neutrality include escalating tensions involving Israel and Hezbollah and generational shifts within the community itself. Younger Armenians are increasingly pushing for active political engagement, leading to potential changes in how neutrality is understood and practiced. The evolving scenario suggests a transition from passive neutrality to active participation, fostering a balance in the community’s political approach.

Despite the difficulties, positive neutrality remains paramount for the Armenian community in Lebanon. The changing sociopolitical landscape necessitates a redefined approach to neutrality that embraces proactive engagement while resisting sectarian conflicts. The future holds significant challenges in preserving the Armenian identity, but continuing efforts to adapt to these changes will be crucial for the community’s endurance.

In conclusion, Armenian positive neutrality in Lebanon has served as a vital strategy for communal survival amid substantial political turbulence. Although the core principle remains intact, external and internal influences necessitate adjustments in the application of this policy. The ongoing evolution of Armenian neutrality will rely on navigating generational shifts and socio-economic changes, aiming to secure both stability and the community’s long-term prosperity.

Original Source: armenianweekly.com