Maro Matosian (*)
Areg Gharabegian in his article “Non-Governmental Organizations in Armenia”
(The Armenian Weekly, Jan. 18, 2014) made an effort to explain the
situation of NGOs, their activities and problems, in Armenia. Having
worked in this sector since 1991, I would like to explore certain points
he made, as he painted a rather critical picture of the civil society
organizations in Armenia.
I would like to start by noting that in the Soviet era, any form of a
non-governmental organization was not allowed. It is true that the
earthquake of 1988 opened the door for the first time in the Soviet
Union to donations as well as to organizations and specialists to come
and work in the devastated area, and subsequently throughout Armenia.
It was not clear if Mr. Gharabegian’s comments were addressed to local NGOs or diaspora- based ones. There are quite important differences between the two: The local NGOs have less resources and are, by and large, unknown to the Armenian Diaspora, which is a large donor for projects. Diaspora-based NGOs working in Armenia are more resourceful, have staff who speak English, and have a tremendous edge in fundraising and PR techniques, as well as grant writing. I should add another category that has brought significant assistance to Armenia: organizations like the ARS, AGBU, the Armenian International Medical Association, and those made up of various professionals groups like engineers and physicists.
The author found that NGOs were incapable of meeting the “growing
demand for emergency services and operations…due to a lack of NGO
skills, knowledge, and capabilities, and the absence of an appropriate
legal framework.” I tend to disagree with this statement; it is overly
simplistic to put the blame on NGOs alone. We must remember that newly
independent Armenia was also inexperienced and lacked the
infrastructure, laws, and experience to deal with aid assistance and
logistics. Sadly, the government even today does not have an emergency
fund or the capability to deal with disasters. And, have we forgotten
the lack of control and oversight, the total anarchy that took place at
the airport, customs, and ports, where goods were diverted directly from
these locations into the hands of thieves? I know of doctors who came
to teach new methods in surgery or provide valuable equipment to local
doctors, who were unwilling to cooperate or were only focused on going
to the U.S., never to return.
It is true that many NGOs mushroomed in the late 1990’s; this
phenomenon was seen in all of the post-Soviet states. I believe this is a
normal process of experimenting with something new, especially where
laws are weak or inexistent. However, now, we have a good core of local
NGOs that are actually very efficient and doing good work. The mission
of these NGOs center around human rights, women’s rights, the rights of
the disabled (both physical and mental), youth, the environment, peace
dialogue, anti corruption, minorities (religious and LGBT), education,
health, culture.
Since 1991, as Mr. Gharabegian pointed out, various rules and laws
have been established primarily to regulate the sector. However, I
disagree with the author when he writes, “The law states that Armenia
recognizes the crucial role of NGOs in the development of civil society
and aims to promote the establishment of NGOs as legal entities.” In
practice, civil society organizations in Armenia are a thorn in the
government’s side because they point out all of the irregularities,
corruption, discrimination, the government’s lack of assistance or
political will for change on various issues, and the overall lack of
human rights and democratic principles in the country. NGOs, depending
on their area of interest, are closely scrutinized by the government and
are many times attacked for being “grant-eaters,” even though Armenia’s
budget exists on grants from the IMF and World Bank (this arose as an
opportunistic reaction to the landscape of the 1990’s, when jobs were
scarce and people basically tailored projects/approaches any which way
in order to secure funding). This argument is used to demean the active
NGOs, rather than address the issues they raise.
Lately, the Armenian government has begun to “promote” local NGOs by
opening their own non-governmental organizations, which in Armenia (and
elsewhere) we call GONGO (government organization NGO)—a paradox. Their
existence, seen throughout the former Soviet states, is to funnel World
Bank, EU, and UN money to their own organizations, which in reality are
part of the government. This is also done as a method of control: By
putting their own NGOs into the mix, they can influence/infiltrate
discussions and claim that other so-called civil society organizations
are of a different opinion (which, in reality, is the position of the
government).
The international organizations know about this, but as this is a new
phenomenon, they have not taken any significant steps. Mr. Gharabegian
mentioned that the World Bank gives out grants to NGOs –actually the
latter mentioned international organizations work, mainly, with the
government directly and the bulk of the donations goes to the
government.
I would like to say a word about volunteers. In post-Soviet states
this was a foreign concept, although I can say that in the past four to
five years, we have seen young people wanting to volunteer. Many,
however, look for paying jobs, given the low income levels of their
families. However, great work has been done by U.S.-based organizations
like Armenian Volunteer Corps and Birthright Armenia, which bring
volunteers from the diaspora—and with them, a huge skill set—which in
turn helps the local NGOs.
Regarding transparency, I agree that only some organizations are
trying to be transparent; however, the ones that receive the biggest
donations in Armenia, like the Holly Church of Etchmiadzin, are not even
accountable for these funds. Even the All-Armenian Fund is not that
transparent.
Finally, I would like to point out that the local and
international-based NGO sector in Armenia has come a long way since
1991. Much training, experience, and practice has raised the level of
efficiency. Of course, there is competition (as there is throughout the
world) when funding is so scarce, but this can be a good thing. NGOs
have moved from providing emergency humanitarian aid to development, and
now to building civil society and promoting human rights. Overall,
civil society over the past eight years has contributed greatly in
raising public awareness on various issues, and in bringing attention to
what the government either hides, considers taboo, or is in denial
about. It is because of these civil society organizations and local NGOs
that today we have increased awareness and civic activism engaged in
the promotion of the rule of law and human rights, and able to offer
services where the government is otherwise absent.
Mr. Gharabegian, I am not sure how you measure “support and citizen
participation in NGO activities,” but suffice it to say that NGOs have
moved public opinion greatly. And when at street protests we used to see
three to five lone individuals, now we see hundreds. And when in the
past no one paid attention to domestic violence, now we get over 56,000
hits for an internet article. NGOs have passed amendments to existing
laws; in our case, we are working to pass a domestic violence law, and
others have developed policies and mechanisms to achieve systemic change
in Armenia.
Lastly, I would like to point out that NGOs have developed, even
flourished, at a time when international assistance to Armenia has
steadily gone down. We now see truly motivated NGOs and even social
movements that want to bring change to Armenia and voice the concerns of
society at large. I would urge Mr. Gharabegian to take a closer look at
the impact and value of NGOs in Armenia.
(*) Founder and executive director, Women’s Support Center NGO, Armenia
"The Armenian Weekly," February 8, 2014
No comments:
Post a Comment