Armenia/ 1. Historical perspective: cultural policies and instruments  

Armenian culture has a history of thousands of years and is a direct and indirect reflection of all those events that impacted on the Armenian people over time and, particularly, in the 20th century. As a result of the genocide and forced deportation of the Armenians that resided in the Ottoman Empire during World War I, many Armenians are spread all over the world, forming the Armenian Diaspora. For those residing far from the homeland, it was the national culture that became the main factor for preserving their national identity. The Great Disaster was followed by a short period of independence (1918-1920) in the eastern smaller part of historical Armenia. Then a 70 year long Soviet regime was established in the country, which had both positive and negative implications.

In 1988, a struggle to recover the Armenian territory of Nagorno Karabakh from Azerbaijan started, which resulted in the war of 1989-1994, a severe socio-economic crisis, emigration, as well as the blockade of Armenia by Turkey and Azerbaijan, which is still continuing. On 21 September 1991, the Republic of Armenia became independent through a referendum. The privatisation and decentralisation processes, which started after independence, included the cultural sector. A private sector started to evolve as well, initially in the form of movie theatres, parks, some concert halls, and small theatres; these were followed by galleries, libraries and museums. However, the economic blockade, the energy crisis and the newly forming market relations became a serious impediment, and the process that had been started naturally was stalled, even fading away in some fields.

On 25 January 2001, Armenia joined the European Council, thereby entering a new phase in the development of its culture.

During the independence years, Armenian cultural policy was mainly directed, not at the development of the infrastructure of the functioning cultural organisations, but was concerned foremost with their preservation. There was a tendency to increase the financing of culture by the state in comparison to previous years, but this was not based on specific strategic programmes, nor was it guided by a specific policy.

The cultural life was increasingly centralised in the capital Yerevan where, after independence, the opportunities for conducting cultural activities flourished. As a result, there was an outflow of specialists from the Marzes (regions) to the capital. The cultural exchanges between the capital and Marzes decreased considerably, which has had negative results for the cultural development processes in Armenia. A state programme on cultural development in the Marzes is being implemented currently to tackle this issue.

During recent years, the link between Armenia and its Diaspora has also been promoting the preservation and development of the culture of Armenia. Thus, since 1992, the AGBU (Armenian General Benevolent Union) has been sponsoring the Armenian Philharmonic Orchestra and, since 1997, Vache Manukyan has been sponsoring the Armenian Chamber Orchestra. Since 2000, numerous cultural centres have been re-established, annual rewards have been presented, books and albums have been published, monuments are being restored, and performances have been produced, with the assistance of the state and the Armenian Relief Society, the Hayastan All-Armenian Fund, and the American-Armenian billionaire Kirk Kerkorian's Lincy Foundation.

The Armenian cultural policy of recent years has been characterised by frequent changes of culture ministers, resulting in various changes to cultural policy. In order to introduce a systematic approach to the cultural management field, the present minister Hasmik Poghosyan (appointed in May 2006) established a group of experts to work on the 2008-2013 Strategy on Cultural Development. Currently, this strategy is being implemented as a core instrument of cultural policy.