Politicizing Sexual Orientation in Armenia

She said, “I ask you to look at me as the collective image of tortured, raped, physically abused, burned, stabbed, killed, emigrated, subjected to discrimination, poor and unemployed transgender people.”

Lilit also enumerated particular crimes committed against individual transgenders.

The appearance of the activist on the podium of the parliament and the way she was brought there threw Armenia’s entire political world into confusion and a blame game ensued.

The first attack was on MP Naira Zohrabyan, a member of the Prosperous Armenia party, who was chairing the session during which organizations and NGOs were invited to a hearing, including the NGO Right Side, headed by Martirosyan.

Zohrabyan, in her turn, was furious that she was not warned ahead of time about the activities of the organization.

The outrage mushroomed to become a national issue, when the country is facing existential danger. On April 8, a rally took place in front of the parliament. The participants in the rally proposed to “reconsecrate” the parliament to “clear it of transgender presence.”

The scandal also involved the government on the highest level. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, addressing the issue and human rights in general, asked “Is Lilit Martirosyan a human being?”

The question naturally assumed that a human being therefore has human rights. But later, he was trapped into the politicization of the debate by stating that Martirosyan’s speech was “a carefully planned political provocation” by the former Republican Party, apparently to undermine the new government.

He further addressed the former leaders and said that “I was telling them that ‘you are gay activists’ and they did not believe me.” He also suggested that the members of the previous administration, which had issued a new passport for Martirosyan with the gender designation of female, clearly had a different perspective.

Martirosyan cited specific cases of crimes against the gay community. No government official addressed the issue, nor did any take responsibility for investigating those crimes and bringing the criminals to justice. However, officials have the time and resources to dismantle the leadership of  Spayka, a huge conglomerate which is exporting Armenia’s agricultural products to Eurasian countries.

The political debate has spilled over into the streets, causing more crimes.

A 15-year-old was stabbed by a 35-year-old man, after the latter assumed the former was gay. Two months earlier, a transgender woman was attacked in her apartment. Another gay man was beaten by several men while he was walking.

Armenia is usually ranked as a “hostile place for LGBT people” by Human Rights Watch. A 2016 survey by the group Pink Armenia found that 90 percent of Armenians think that gay rights should be controlled through legal measures. Armenia currently ranks 48th among 49 European countries on the European gay rights group ILGA Europe annual Rainbow Map.

The way the issue was handled acted as an incendiary bomb thrown from the forum of the Parliament and it triggered outrage and political turmoil; the issue further received international reverberations. United Nations and the European Union officials jumped into the debate to question and condemn Armenia’s record on human rights and gender issues, to which the Foreign Ministry issued a rebuke. Indeed, Anna Naghdalyan, the Foreign Ministry spokesperson, said, “Our international partners should demonstrate more respect and sensitivity toward Armenian society and refrain from undue engagement in public debate, even if they disagree with its tone. We would like to remind them that the principle of public morality is part of international commitments on human rights and cannot be ignored.”

Armenia is a conservative society and its evolution in social acceptance will certainly take time. Even then, because of its more closed, inward looking stance, it will not be the same as Western Europe. What should not happen is for foreign-based NGOs and other civil society bodies to insert themselves in the issue, and by extension, in the country. Are there problems? Yes. But will foreign intervention help? We don’t think so. In fact, if might cause the issue to backfire.

To demonstrate the discrepancy between the West and Armenia in this regard, we can turn to an essay by a young writer in Azg, Gevorg Gurumlyan, who wrote: “The national struggles against immorality will continue spiritually and physically. National dignity is above all. Let them say what they want. If we have to become a progressive nation by putting up with immorality, forgive me for saying that we prefer to remain a regressive society.”

Emancipation for Armenia will come through education and through exposure to Western values. But even then, it will not be on par with the west.

If left alone, the young and progressive leadership of the country will be able to steer Armenia toward a more open and tolerant society, without the heavy hand of outsiders.

As the recent incident and subsequent developments show, politicizing sexual orientation remains a toxic and explosive domain.