Why do Armenians leave their Motherland?

Migration fromArmeniahit the highest point in 1995-1996. And though no accurate statistics on migration does exist, the approximate number stated is a 100 thousand a year. According to independent experts as a result of mass exodus, the population of the country has decreased by a million. Motivations forcing people part with their motherland, with their relatives and friends are commonly known. Those are first of all, the critical economic situation, as a consequence of which thousands of Armenian families were driven to poverty, and not only inArmenia, but throughout the whole post-soviet territory.

The situation was exacerbated with the war in Karabagh, the blockade, and the consequences of Spitak earthquake, the energy crisis and mass unemployment following the closure of industrial companies. For some of the Russian-speaking population liquidation of Russian schools was added to the general misfortunes. For a while the Armenian people was in expectation for the government to find ways out of the crisis situation, but soon the hopelessness of the situation became obvious for everyone, and mass exodus broke out, for the migrants considered emigration the only way for salvation.

In those years just as it is now, in fact, many experts wanted to find out why Armenia of all the post-soviet countries was the first to hit the track, why so many of that tiniest former Soviet republic’s citizens were leaving their country?

There are several answers to the question. First of all, that is the mentality of a nation having been persecuted for ages, ready to be uprooted and look for refuge in other countries. There is even a saying that the indigenous Armenians have a mentality of migrant tribes.” The ability to react swiftly and adequately to any danger was worked out through life experience of many generations and it is laid deep in historic memory of the nation. Therefore, the old saying - “Where you find your bread, there you should stay” – is not just and expression of pragmatism - it is genetics.

The second motivating force behind migration is the Diaspora, and of course, not in the sense that our countrymen living abroad have provoked our citizens to leaveArmenia. On the contrary, with a generous flow of financial support and enormous loads of humanitarian assistance they have tried to ease their plight as much as they could, and keep them on their land. But the very existence of a strong and influential Diaspora of Armenians many of whom had their relatives and friends at home, inspired migrants with confidence that they won’t feel lonely in foreign lands, that someone of their kin will undoubtedly support and help them. And often than not such was the case.

And finally, the third reason is also laid in genetic levels. Armenians are keenly devoted to their families. The English proverb – “ My home is my castle” might be applied to them in a little different context; “My family is my castle.” And that is why as soon as any of our countrymen appears abroad and is more or less settled down, he will immediately start pulling friends and relatives after him, whether close or distant. The latter in their turn, do the same, and in this way a chain reaction sparks out in the country, which certainly causes great intellectual, physical, economic and demographic damage to the potential of the country.

Speaking of demographic damage, we mean first of all, that as a result of a strong outflow of people, the majority of which are of reproductive age, a process called “aging” is triggered. In the totality of citizens who stay behind, the larger ratio falls with elderly and older people, not only unfit for reproduction, but unable to be of any service to the country. This, according to the general approach, is one of the worst consequences of migration.

Migration causes as severe a blow to the economy of the country. The outflow of relatively intellectual, creatively minded, promising professionals is a heavy setback for economic development. Many of these are young people who are compelled to sign contracts with foreign companies, since there is little demand for their skills locally, and their work is poorly remunerated in their country. Having said that, the experience of many countries has shown that the best thing is to deal migration pragmatically rather than negatively, deriving as much benefit as possible for the country.

Particularly, the existence of many of our specialists abroad has played a major role in many of the vitally important spheres. They contributed not only to send large quantities of computers, books, and materials, valuable medications and equipment from abroad, but also helped to the development of creative contacts, introduction of joint ventures and jobs, endorsement of profitable for Armenia accords with foreign firms on science, education and health. As an example we might site Ara Abrahamian’s case: He had migrated from Armeniasome time in the past and today he is making large investments in the economy, education and banking. Such examples are quite a few. 
Besides, thanks to migration the world learns more and more about our country, and its history. As Professor Grigor Yerznkatsian fromZambia said during his recent visit toArmenia, it is exactly due to the last influx that African people got to knowArmenia, its history, and that this was a biblical country with ancient culture and talented people, who have suffered the tragedy of Genocide. 

It can be controlled

Up until the year of 2000 migration was almost uncontrollable. People left through all available and unavailable methods, most often illegally. Many having received short-term invitation visas, simply never returned. According to RA National Statistics Service, in the total number of migrants the larger ratio belongs to people aged 20-29 years. They make half of all Armenians having left the country. In 1999-2000, for the first time in the last 10 years some decrease in the migration process was registered with the migration saldo minus 40 thousand - much less than the previous years. Already in 2002 a zero saldo was marked. How can this be explained? Many of those who having planned to leave had nevertheless, stayed behind, do not base their decision by the fact that the situation in the country has changed, or perspectives for a better future of the country are encouraging, though that too, should not be excluded. As many new companies open and a large-scale construction is under way, part of the population has found jobs. Some having built up a starting capital have opened their businesses and have started to earn pretty well.

But the situation for those who are on budget sustenance, as well as the relatively vulnerable part of the population – namely, single pensioners, invalids, children and orphans - is still very dismal. Nevertheless, many Armenians explain their reluctance and reservation to leave the country by the rigid migration policies adopted in many countries against illegal emigrants, and especially against those from the CIS. For example, just a few years ago accepting one’s affiliation to the unregistered “Jehovah’s Witnesses” sect, or to a sexual minority group was quite sufficient an argument for liberal attitude in some of the Western countries and in the US for people being persecuted in their countries. Presently such bare statements are not sufficient, and “outsiders” are required to provide sound proof and documented evidence of their statements.

On July 1, 2002 a new law on citizenship was adopted inRussiawhere a large number of migrants fromArmeniahave been flowing in search of jobs. The law has had a colossal influence on migration processes in many CIS countries, includingArmenia. This law is principally different from the previous one, which had been quite liberal for immigrants from the CIS countries.

In particular, the fact that adopting Russian citizenship one could still retain his Armenian passport, used to be an important incentive for many. This was not as much a legal, as purely a psychological consideration, which allowed keeping in touch with the Motherland.

The new law allows for no such leeway, and someone obtaining Russian citizenship should clearly make his choice. Since 2002 only at the expense of renouncing Armenian citizenship one may become a Russian. According to the experts, this is the very factor having influenced further development of the migration processes inArmenia. Another factor that has forced migrants to return fromRussiais the anti-Armenian attitude, sweeping parts ofRussia, particularly, theKrasnodarregion. The peak of re-emigration came about last summer, when a few thousand Armenian families returned fromRussiatoArmenia. Three years ago on the initiative of the IOM the first attempts were made to somehow regulate the uncontrolled migration processes, and direct them to a steady rout. To that end an international coalition was founded which was named “a Grape vine.” Countries that had suffered most from migration and countries where most of the migrants are trying to find refuge were included in the coalition - Germany Denmark, theNetherlands,Belgium,Sweden,Switzerland, etc. International state and public organizations of participating countries have been recruited to jointly work on the project. Already three most fruitful meetings have been held inTbilisi, where participants exchanged information, each side presenting its own project of resolving migration problems. And in fact, the receiving countries were mainly concerned to find ways in which they could help to stop mass exodus of citizens. One of the main privileges of such an international coalition is that here the problem of “burnt bridges” has been eliminated. The reality of 10 years of migration, and not only inArmenia, has come to prove that everything doesn’t always go well in foreign countries. Many would have liked to return, but since they had left illegally, they consider the way back home closed forever.

It is for this specific purpose thatArmeniahas already signed several bilateral agreements according to which it has pledged not to obstruct its citizens who wish to return. Such an accord is signed for example withDenmark. And recently within the frames of this agreement and through the support of IOM 114 Armenian citizens have returned from Turkmenia.

IOM has also undertaken the duty to ease the process of re-integration, which is quite complicated. For those who had left their countries a few years ago, it will be difficult to adapt to essentially new for them environment. A special program has been developed for them, including support to organize and develop small businesses, provide counseling and recommendations in forming a business-plan, as well as provision of financial credits, the total sum of which has already grown to about two million US dollars.

About 1800 families from the so-called risk group have already been recruited in small businesses. These are people who have returned to their country but potentially if not successful, are ready to become migrants again.

State Support to labor migration

One of the most actual and to this day unresolved issues is labor migration, which is, in fact most common inArmenia. Many men leaving their families behind go to various countries, and most frequently toRussiafor jobs. Despite the fact that there are inter-governmental agreements on quotas for jobs with many CIS countries andRussia, the process of labor migration is absolutely uncontrolled. As a result of this the hired workers retain their illegal status, i.e. are deprived of any rights and present a cheap work force. Armenian laws so far, do not provide for their protection in any way. Moreover, numerous firms and companies dealing with employment of Armenians abroad often draw people into fraudulent deals and swindling their money fail to fulfill any of their assumed responsibilities. And instead of protecting its citizens from such kind of “firms” the state has allowed them to operate without license, thus relieving them of any control and completely untying their hands.

Instead, a well-worked out and timely law on labor migration might have made the process controllable and not only provide protection for our citizens toiling abroad, but also derive considerable interest for the state budget through a system of taxation on incomes earned abroad by our citizens. By the way, this is the policy that most countries follow.

However, though the State Administration for Migration and Refugees (SAMR) has worked out quite an interesting draft law on migration, which includes a provision on labor migration, it has not been discussed and adopted by the Parliament, yet. On the State level two codes on labor migration have also been introduced, by the SAMR, and by the Welfare Administration (Ministry of Social Protection). Being almost identical, those two, are essentially useless, and the state still does not have a clear policy on dealing with one of the most delicate national problems – migration. 
However, serious attempts to introduce such a program have been made. For several years there had been a large-scale cooperation between state, public, and international organizations to introduce the basic document on “RA Migration Policy.” Well-known international experts, like Thomas Ochakozo from thePhilippines too, have studied the document to match it up with all international requirements. Their joint efforts have yielded a document recently signed by Prime-Minister Andranik Margarian. This document will essentially become the state policy on migration issues.

Refugees 15 years ago having fled fromAzerbaijanas a result of ethnic cleansing, present a special category of Armenian migrants. According to the 1997official data, of 360 thousand refugees only 311 thousand have remained inArmenia. The main reasons to leave their Motherland and venture a new exodus were the disastrous financial situation lack of jobs and housing. This is exactly why cherishing their red passports the vast majority of refugees refused to accept Armenian citizenship, hoping to use the status of a refugee to obtain normal existence abroad.

According to Gagik Yeganian, Chief of Migration and Refugees Administration, life conditions of refugees are 2-4 times worse than that of the local population. This is the reason why only 37 thousand of the 311 thousand living over 10 years in a common with the aboriginal population ethnic environment, have accepted citizenship of theRepublicofArmenia.

Out of the 92 thousand families remaining inArmenia12 thousand are still deprived of a living place and are ranked in the extremely needy category. These people are potential migrants, ready to leave the country at the first opportunity, where they couldn’t adapt, after all. Back in 2000 the AMR provided a housing project for 12 thousand families with a total value of 54 million US dollars. The goal is to provide housing for 1,5 thousand refugee families within the next two and a half- to three years. Recently, the Armenian government has adopted a resolution on privatizing the lands of the cottages reserved for refugees. However, despite these positive initiations, the refugee situation is still extremely miserable, and many of them still do not want to tie their future withArmenia. The fate of people that have condemned themselves to alienation from their own Motherland and with their roots is truly tragic. But if they choose such a destiny, it means living in their own country is even more difficult for then than in other countries. Therefore, as a famous writer has noted, let us not blame the foreign lands, instead, let us make our Motherland fit for living a decent life. Closing borders, introducing all kinds of barriers is useless and futile. Those who cannot survive in their country will still have a preference for strange lands. It would be better to use those efforts to make things right in our Motherland, so that nobody ever wants to leave.

Maybe, that is the most direct way to struggle against migration.

Valeriya Zakharian

http://www.caucasusjournalists.net