An Interview with Jeffrey Tufenkian
Jeffrey Tufenkian is the President of the Armenian Forests NGO as well as its co-founder. He was also one of the founders of the Kanach Foundation. Jeffrey Tufenkian's background is in advocacy on environmental, public health, human rights and consumer issues, mainly in the United States. He also has extensive experience in outreach work and organizing students, lobbying for legislative changes and media advocacy. He moved to Armenia three years ago.
This interview was held in Yerevan, Republic of Armenia on 8 September 2005. It is part of continuing research for an article on the possible role of the Armenian Diaspora in democracy building in the Republic of Armenia.
ONNIK KRIKORIAN: Did you come to Armenia to work specifically in the area of the environment?
JEFFREY TUFENKIAN: Yes, but not in a “cookie-cutter” fashion. It’s trying to take what’s the best of what’s happening in the West, which in some ways has gone in one direction but is now coming back a little towards a more green direction. I would like to help Armenia take a shorter path in realizing a more sustainable approach.
OK: I think it’s fair to say that you’re not a typical Armenian from the Diaspora. You weren’t brought up in a Diasporan community and you weren’t involved in community events. What was the thing that brought you to Armenia? Did you want to live in the “homeland,” or did you want to bring your experience in the area of the environment and apply it in Armenia?
JT: It was a combination of factors. I didn’t grow up in an Armenian community although a small community emerged in Portland, Oregon, after I left and when I was no longer living there. There’s definitely some attraction to the “homeland” and what that’s all about, but it hasn’t been a dominant theme in my life or, at least, hadn’t been before.
One thing that was attractive for me was the opportunity to come and work in a country where there are possibilities. It’s a relatively small place, and although there are many problems, they aren’t quite as entrenched as they might be in the West in terms of behaving and thinking. In some ways, because there’s been recent change although things haven’t been working so well, there might be more potential for actually making bigger changes.
In the West, and the U.S. in particular, there’s a level of comfort and inertia that’s connected with a current way of thinking and ways of doing things that makes it a little bit more difficult to change. It’s a much bigger beast. So, the potential for actually realizing some change here was definitely attractive to me, and continues to be.
OK: Is there a link between environmental awareness and lobbying with democratization?
JT: I would certainly hope there’s a link and our organization is now moving in the direction of specifically developing that connection. For example, we’ve recently started a project funded by USAID which is a civic participation orientated project working with ten different communities to develop environmental action groups and to help them become more informed and activated, as well as to investigate and advocate for changes on environmental issues in their communities.
OK: It’s difficult for me to think about how best to describe Armenian Forests. It’s not a Diasporan organization, for example, it’s a local NGO.
JT: It’s a local Armenian NGO funded from abroad. Our main funding is from the Tufenkian Foundation although we’ve received about seven different grants from DFID, Open Society Institute, USAID and others. I’m the only foreigner working in the organization. Everybody else is from Armenia.
OK: I suppose we can say that regardless of whether you came from a Diasporan community or not, you are still an example of an ethnic Armenian from abroad who is involved to some extent in civil society building and development. I don’t think that this is very common but do you think the Diaspora has a role, could play a role and should play a role in the whole broad spectrum of environmental awareness, human rights, democracy-building, and supporting civil society etc?
JT: Definitely, and I feel very strongly that the Diaspora should be more involved. There are some examples of involvement in these areas but I think that the Diaspora should realize that Armenia is moving away from needing immediate post-earthquake handout assistance to needing support in its development for the long-term.
OK: The Diaspora is only realizing this now?
JT: I hope that its happening.
OK: Yet, when I arrived in Armenia in 1998, the Government and United Nations had already declared its intention to move into that phase. It’s taken seven years for the Diaspora to realize the same?
JT: It’s hard to generalize. There are different segments of the Diaspora working, or not working, in different areas but yes, I’d really love to see the Diaspora become more involved in things that some people might call political. For example, looking at democracy-building, addressing corruption issues, and looking at how to support sustainable development.
OK: The recent success of the campaign to save the Shikahogh Nature Reserve was unprecedented. Would you say that although the movement was based in Armenia, the involvement of the Diaspora was crucial in attaining that success?
JT. Definitely. It was very important and the involvement of a couple of Diasporan investors and donors made a big difference. I think the Armenian Government is used to ignoring the local population and to some extent, local NGOs but its more difficult for them to ignore international organizations, major funders, investors, and people that are putting money into pockets here.
OK: Regarding Shikahogh, there were letters from Hrair Hovnanian, Chairman of the Armenian Assembly of Armenia and Carolyn Mugar appealed to Armenians in the Diaspora to get involved in a letter-writing campaign.
JT: She came here just for that issue and was appealing to people to put pressure on the government. I think those measures really helped.
OK: Why was Shikahogh different? I mean, the Diaspora never generally concerns itself with other things. For example, if there’s trouble on Baghramian or if another set of elections are deeply flawed, it doesn’t get involved. Is it because while the environment is a political issue because we’re talking about policy, corruption and the rule of law, it’s less of a politicized issue? It’s political but not politicized?
JT: Exactly, and that’s one of the things I’m excited about – the idea of using the environment to build democracy. That’s one of the points we made in applying to USAID for our grant. Environmental issues are less politically charged, there’s less emotion behind them and although people care about them, or don’t care about them, there’s not a lot of other “baggage.”
It’s a little bit more straightforward and it’s a little bit cleaner. In that sense, you’re simply focusing on a problem, getting people involved in finding a solution and I’m hoping that the environment can be a great example of building democracy in Armenia.
OK: However, people are very concerned with deforestation in Armenia and the fact that Armenia will not have any forests left in 20 years time. People took an interest in Shikahogh but so far, there’s not a murmur of concern about this issue in the Diaspora. If Armenians living abroad care about the republic, then surely they must realize that if there’s no forests left, there’s also not much of a country. There’ll be desertification, and disruption of the entire ecosystem. Perhaps its even a matter of national security?
JT: Yes, it’s a huge issue. However, I think the difference between Shikahogh and deforestation in general was that Shikahogh was very immediate and very specific. We were talking about declassifying this pristine forest, putting a major highway right through the middle of it, about Persian leopards and other indigenous species, everything visual. There were lots of different elements.
The deforestation issue is a little bit more entrenched. There are local officials and we assume high level officials involved. Certainly, there are military people involved in illegal cutting and there’s corruption all down the road, both literally and figuratively, so it’s a little bit harder to mobilize people all at once to address this. Of course, I’m hopeful that we can do that and I actually think that there have been some murmurs [in the Diaspora].
There’s definitely been coverage in the media in the Diaspora about this issue, and hopefully, we can build on success with Shikahogh to address pieces of, and ultimately the whole of, this issue.
OK: When you go back to the United States, do you arrange public meetings to talk about environmental issues in Armenia?
JT: I will this fall. We’ve been pretty focused on developing the organization, our projects and work here but we’ll start reaching out.
OK: In your opinion, what is the main role the Diaspora can play in this area? Is it all simply about donations or is it also about writing letters, campaigning etc.
JT: All of the above. I mean, the biggest need in terms of funding for us is when we talk about re-foresting Armenia and taking it from 8 or 9 percent of territory covered with forests now and getting it back to a reasonable level of 20-25 percent. We’re talking about millions and millions and millions of dollars. Certainly, there’s a huge financial need when it comes to re-forestation way beyond the means of our organization’s budget.
However, in terms of bringing about the political will to stop de-forestation which is a bigger problem and actually more urgent than mass re-forestation, pressure through letters, phone calls, meetings with key officials etc would be hugely important.
OK: One thing that’s always said is that you can never impose democracy from outside. Instead, it must come from within and be a natural development in society. On the other hand, the Diaspora isn’t an international organization. It’s ethnically Armenian, supposedly with an attachment to the republic, and so, we’re in a kind of gray area.
JT: I think I would ultimately like to see a Diaspora more involved with looking at what’s best for the country. I think that in terms of this kind of inside-outside perspective, there’s a lot of Diasporans that haven’t been here and have a romanticized or inaccurate picture of what the needs are, and what the potential is. So, I guess, I would love to have the Diaspora come here and explore, and to look at what the challenges and opportunities are. We’re talking about development, so we’re talking about investing in businesses which in many ways would go a lot further than donating money to something that’s going to stop there. If the Diaspora can create jobs and the environment for economic activities, it’s giving local Armenians the chance to build a country themselves.
Granted, it’s easier just to write a cheque and send some money but I think more good will come if intelligent businesses are started and supported, partnered with local Armenians.
OK: With regards to just giving money, there’s another issue here in terms of the Diaspora not demanding accountability or transparency and very often not knowing where that money goes, or where it doesn’t as the case may be. Related to that, and also to what you said about the Diaspora not being fully aware of the problems here, we also have a problem with the lack of reliable information coming out of the country.
Do you think that the Diaspora should start to demand transparency and accountability and with regards to investment, that there should be some kind of responsibility in terms of what areas people invest in?
JT: Regarding the first part of the question, absolutely. There should be accountability and I think again, let the Diaspora use its leverage to demand it. The Diaspora has given huge sums of money and accountability has to be part of it. It should use it as leverage to demand free and open process and curb corruption down the line. In terms of investment, we can talk about it as a “triple bottom line.”
I’m not sure if you’re familiar with that term but it means looking at things that provide economic return as well social and environmental benefits. Ideally, businesses will do that and there will be other paybacks and dividends down the road for Armenia. The Diaspora is uniquely positioned to care about such things. Yes, investors might want to come in and make money, that’s great, but let’s also look at social returns.
What’s the return for the environment or the long-term livability and prosperity for the country and its inhabitants? In terms of investment, I think that non-Diasporans see Armenia as a developing country where they can come in, set up the dirtiest of businesses, and get away with almost anything. My hope is that the Diaspora has broader interests and can help mitigate that. Armenia needs jobs, it needs factories, it needs that type of development but hopefully when Diasporan investors come, it will be with an eye not just to get the quickest financial return.
Other investors might only be interested in setting up quick and dirty. it doesn’t matter as long as they can milk as much profit out as possible.
|
