Tweet
You Are Thieves and Cheaters
Siranuysh Papyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/interview24949.html
Published: 14:15:35 - 28/01/2012
Interview with Andreas Ghukasyan, political scientist
Mr. Ghukasyan, in his New Year message Serzh Sargsyan noted that the
elections are understood as a way of seizing or holding on to power,
and it is time to understand that there are higher goals and he will
do everything to rid of this vicious stereotype. The election process
has started. Does Serzh Sargsyan's speech mean that we will have a
different political situation in this election?
The issue must be viewed from the internal and external points of
view. If we view the situation of the Republic of Armenia, the head of
state and the party which supports him from the outside, it should be
noted that the external climate, political world and environment are
changing. On the one hand, the developments in Arab states, on the
other hand, the elaboration of the political field in Europe,
fundamental change is happening in the entire world.
Naturally, the head of any banana or eggplant republic should send a
message to the external world that he is in line with the
international processes because otherwise he may be run over.
If we view from the inside, people's consciousness remains in the
system which is already past. A great part of the society does not
understand the mainstream which the president already knows. Hence,
the president has an advantage. He understands that it is necessary to
lead in this process and say that it is time to crash the system which
guarantees misgovernment, and he will lead the cause.
Is the society in the Soviet past or the first years of independence?
If we view the past, we will see that we had fundamental change of
government and the political system once in 12 years. The first stage
was the movement of 88 for Karabakh and independence and the main
slogan then was independence, self-determination and democracy. The
other stage was in 2000, the change of government in Russia, and at
the same time the change of government in Armenia, that is a
government within the government which ridded of the actors of the
previous period, Yeltsin in Russia and Levon Ter-Petrosyan, Vazgen
Sargsyan and others in Armenia. And a new slogan appears - lets come
together and develop the economy.
12 years later, we can see that in Russia people stood up and told
them they are thieves and cheaters. The slogan now is - end
misgovernment.
Our society is in the first stage of developing the economy, while the
president is already in the next stage of struggling `thieves and
cheaters'.
In this regard, are Serzh Sargsyan's intentions positive and is a
downward change possible?
It depends on whether the president as a person can gain the
confidence of the society or not. The logic of our political process
is the following: coming to government with the support of people who
have money is needed because the public is ready to sell their votes
and tolerates election fraud. In other words, a government which makes
compromise allows people who can strike deals form government. As a
result, the government becomes the product of deals, while the leader
of the ruling class finalizes all the deals. Will the person who came
to government in this way be able to change the system? This question
concerns not only Sargsyan but also Putin, Mubarak, Gaddafi, all the
people who come to power in this way. My answer is no, it is
impossible. Because one needs to break relations with all those people
who helped you come to government through deals. There are rare
examples, of course. In Singapore, a national leader was able to rid
of his entourage, supporters and shape another government. In Armenia,
there are forces which like to refer to the example of Singapore. And
they dream of the same thing but without changing anything. Is it
possible to eliminate misgovernment by leaving the oligarchs, corrupt
ministers and officials in their positions?
In other words, can Serzh Sargyan fight these things alone?
Not that he is unable to fight his own political basis but a
reasonable man would not think about chopping the branch on which he
is sitting. There must be extreme reasons, extreme challenges to force
a politician to destroy his political assets. For this purpose, he
needs another group to rely on. In Armenia the president does not and
will never have such a group.
What should be done if there is no such group?
The government should go on a diet, which means legitimization and
division of property in favor of the society. Will the ruling class be
able to solve such a problem independently? Considering our
peculiarities and people's readiness to fight for the smallest
personal property, I exclude it. Our ruling class cannot make up its
mind to give power to another force which will be able to establish
the rule of law for everyone, including itself, and nobody's property
will be the target of political games.
Is there a force which will be able to substitute the present government?
In 2000, a new force emerged which substituted the incapable
government, today the government has a reserve team which will be able
to tell the world it is the changed adequate political force which has
all the tools to do something in the country. It is the prime
minister's team with all its resource, including oligarchs.
However, there is no confidence in the prime minister's word because
everyone sees that his words are not translated into action.
This is a situation when the government has teams with different
values and goals, so no force can display absolute abilities. They
restrain one another, they fight with one another.
Let's get back to the opposition. In fact, the opposition does not
have a new political culture. There is only an idea - go forward
towards the past. We have two groups of activists of this idea, Levon
Ter-Petrosyan is pointing to 1997. Beyond him there is a camp of red
forces which point to even the remoter past.
The new political force will lead forward. The global experience shows
that it must emerge in the opposition. New structures may emerge in
the opposition which will prove their capability to the society.
Will there be no alternative to elections?
Only elections can be alternative to elections. We need to change the
political system, that is the Constitution. In order to change it, a
competent body must be created which can be done only by an entity
which carries power. The entity which carries power in Armenia is the
public. If the majority of citizens elect a constitutional assembly
and authorize their representatives to represent their interests, this
body will be able to change the constitution, that is the entire
political system, adopting a new model and presenting it to the
society for approval. I think this is the necessary path rather than
an alternative.
Why do we need a new constitution? Which points of the existing
constitutions do you disagree with?
Our constitution does not guarantee the right to employment. Our
government has no such duty. The income of welfare of a citizen is his
or her work. A society cannot consist of entrepreneurs only. This is a
fundamental point that must be added, and from which the other points
will proceed - the right to social security, the right to welfare. The
philosophy of the revenant chapter of our constitution is think for
yourself.
Is this political scramble imitation?
I think it is because there is lack of confidence in the election
commission, so the opposition must stand at the barricades and demand
change of election commissions. Instead, we can see that parties want
to eliminate single-member districts and adopt full proportional
representation. If there is a will to form a legitimate government,
the issue of election commissions must be a key one. In other words,
the political scramble is not for fair elections and legitimate
government.
Siranuysh Papyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/interview24949.html
Published: 14:15:35 - 28/01/2012
Interview with Andreas Ghukasyan, political scientist
Mr. Ghukasyan, in his New Year message Serzh Sargsyan noted that the
elections are understood as a way of seizing or holding on to power,
and it is time to understand that there are higher goals and he will
do everything to rid of this vicious stereotype. The election process
has started. Does Serzh Sargsyan's speech mean that we will have a
different political situation in this election?
The issue must be viewed from the internal and external points of
view. If we view the situation of the Republic of Armenia, the head of
state and the party which supports him from the outside, it should be
noted that the external climate, political world and environment are
changing. On the one hand, the developments in Arab states, on the
other hand, the elaboration of the political field in Europe,
fundamental change is happening in the entire world.
Naturally, the head of any banana or eggplant republic should send a
message to the external world that he is in line with the
international processes because otherwise he may be run over.
If we view from the inside, people's consciousness remains in the
system which is already past. A great part of the society does not
understand the mainstream which the president already knows. Hence,
the president has an advantage. He understands that it is necessary to
lead in this process and say that it is time to crash the system which
guarantees misgovernment, and he will lead the cause.
Is the society in the Soviet past or the first years of independence?
If we view the past, we will see that we had fundamental change of
government and the political system once in 12 years. The first stage
was the movement of 88 for Karabakh and independence and the main
slogan then was independence, self-determination and democracy. The
other stage was in 2000, the change of government in Russia, and at
the same time the change of government in Armenia, that is a
government within the government which ridded of the actors of the
previous period, Yeltsin in Russia and Levon Ter-Petrosyan, Vazgen
Sargsyan and others in Armenia. And a new slogan appears - lets come
together and develop the economy.
12 years later, we can see that in Russia people stood up and told
them they are thieves and cheaters. The slogan now is - end
misgovernment.
Our society is in the first stage of developing the economy, while the
president is already in the next stage of struggling `thieves and
cheaters'.
In this regard, are Serzh Sargsyan's intentions positive and is a
downward change possible?
It depends on whether the president as a person can gain the
confidence of the society or not. The logic of our political process
is the following: coming to government with the support of people who
have money is needed because the public is ready to sell their votes
and tolerates election fraud. In other words, a government which makes
compromise allows people who can strike deals form government. As a
result, the government becomes the product of deals, while the leader
of the ruling class finalizes all the deals. Will the person who came
to government in this way be able to change the system? This question
concerns not only Sargsyan but also Putin, Mubarak, Gaddafi, all the
people who come to power in this way. My answer is no, it is
impossible. Because one needs to break relations with all those people
who helped you come to government through deals. There are rare
examples, of course. In Singapore, a national leader was able to rid
of his entourage, supporters and shape another government. In Armenia,
there are forces which like to refer to the example of Singapore. And
they dream of the same thing but without changing anything. Is it
possible to eliminate misgovernment by leaving the oligarchs, corrupt
ministers and officials in their positions?
In other words, can Serzh Sargyan fight these things alone?
Not that he is unable to fight his own political basis but a
reasonable man would not think about chopping the branch on which he
is sitting. There must be extreme reasons, extreme challenges to force
a politician to destroy his political assets. For this purpose, he
needs another group to rely on. In Armenia the president does not and
will never have such a group.
What should be done if there is no such group?
The government should go on a diet, which means legitimization and
division of property in favor of the society. Will the ruling class be
able to solve such a problem independently? Considering our
peculiarities and people's readiness to fight for the smallest
personal property, I exclude it. Our ruling class cannot make up its
mind to give power to another force which will be able to establish
the rule of law for everyone, including itself, and nobody's property
will be the target of political games.
Is there a force which will be able to substitute the present government?
In 2000, a new force emerged which substituted the incapable
government, today the government has a reserve team which will be able
to tell the world it is the changed adequate political force which has
all the tools to do something in the country. It is the prime
minister's team with all its resource, including oligarchs.
However, there is no confidence in the prime minister's word because
everyone sees that his words are not translated into action.
This is a situation when the government has teams with different
values and goals, so no force can display absolute abilities. They
restrain one another, they fight with one another.
Let's get back to the opposition. In fact, the opposition does not
have a new political culture. There is only an idea - go forward
towards the past. We have two groups of activists of this idea, Levon
Ter-Petrosyan is pointing to 1997. Beyond him there is a camp of red
forces which point to even the remoter past.
The new political force will lead forward. The global experience shows
that it must emerge in the opposition. New structures may emerge in
the opposition which will prove their capability to the society.
Will there be no alternative to elections?
Only elections can be alternative to elections. We need to change the
political system, that is the Constitution. In order to change it, a
competent body must be created which can be done only by an entity
which carries power. The entity which carries power in Armenia is the
public. If the majority of citizens elect a constitutional assembly
and authorize their representatives to represent their interests, this
body will be able to change the constitution, that is the entire
political system, adopting a new model and presenting it to the
society for approval. I think this is the necessary path rather than
an alternative.
Why do we need a new constitution? Which points of the existing
constitutions do you disagree with?
Our constitution does not guarantee the right to employment. Our
government has no such duty. The income of welfare of a citizen is his
or her work. A society cannot consist of entrepreneurs only. This is a
fundamental point that must be added, and from which the other points
will proceed - the right to social security, the right to welfare. The
philosophy of the revenant chapter of our constitution is think for
yourself.
Is this political scramble imitation?
I think it is because there is lack of confidence in the election
commission, so the opposition must stand at the barricades and demand
change of election commissions. Instead, we can see that parties want
to eliminate single-member districts and adopt full proportional
representation. If there is a will to form a legitimate government,
the issue of election commissions must be a key one. In other words,
the political scramble is not for fair elections and legitimate
government.