Tweet
"AS A CITIZEN I PLEAD GUILTY, AS A FIDAYI I DON'T"
Hakob Badalyan
Lragir, Armenia
Aug 3 2007
"I plead guilty as a citizen. As a fidayi [freedom fighter] I don't."
Vahan Aroyan who was involved in the case of Jirair Sefilyan and
Vardan Malkhasyan on charges of keeping illegal weapon offered this
plea of guilt at the court of law. I would like to note immediately
I have no doubt that Sefilyan, Malkhasyan and Aroyan are political
prisoners. Aroyan's weapons would never be found if there was no need
to concoct Sefilyan's and Malkhasyan's case. Or nobody would ever try
to "reveal" Jirair Sefilyan's revolver which is allegedly illegal,
according to Sefilyan and his friends, an absolutely legal gift
from the commander of the NKR army Samvel Babayan. This is not the
problem. The case is obviously political. Perhaps it is worthwhile to
focus on the civil aspect of the problem. Therefore, Vahan Aroyan's
pronouncement seems rather interesting, which is much deeper than
just a plea of guilt or self-criticism.
"As a citizen I plead guilty, as a fidayi I don't." It appears from
this pronouncement that a fidayi is not a citizen. And the question
occurs right away how many people in Armenia and Karabakh who fought
in the war in Karabakh consider themselves as fidayis and consequently
they think they can do things a citizen cannot. Assuming that Vahan
Aroyan is the victim of the political situation, we must nevertheless
admit that the current political situation is the consequence of the
thinking Vahan Aroyan shares. In other words, over the past 15 years of
independence of Armenia the factor of the fighters has constantly been
manipulated to stand above the society and the citizens. For instance,
when Robert Kocharyan was running for presidency in 1998 and 2003, his
campaign involved a lot of military clothing, guns, his participation
in the war in Karabakh was mentioned often as an advantage over his
opponents, first the father than the son Demirchyans.
Apart from the division of political influence, the factor of war
underlay the economic distribution. All the field commanders, even
the generals of "tarmac" who wore the military clothing for at least
ten days running in the years of war became owners of some sector of
the economy. "As a citizen I plead guilty, as a fidayi I don't." Any
general can assert this who owns, for instance, all the fixed-route
bus lines to the region of Armavir. He can say as a citizen he does
not have the right to monopolize all the fixed-route bus lines but as
a fidayi he earned that right. Or as a citizen, the government does
not have the right to forgive General Manvel's son, but as the son of
a fidayi he earned the right to teach lessons to the public. This is a
highly dangerous way of thinking which might very often push people to
commit illegal actions because they are convinced that they have rights
others do not have because they participated in the liberation war.
The participants of the liberation war certainly deserve attention,
social allowances. But regarding civic rights and duties, nobody can
have advantages over the other citizens. In this case, the phenomenon
is concerned rather than Vahan Aroyan. Vahan Aroyan is just another
victim of this phenomenon, the victim of the reality that stems from
this thinking, who is neither the first nor the last.
Hakob Badalyan
Lragir, Armenia
Aug 3 2007
"I plead guilty as a citizen. As a fidayi [freedom fighter] I don't."
Vahan Aroyan who was involved in the case of Jirair Sefilyan and
Vardan Malkhasyan on charges of keeping illegal weapon offered this
plea of guilt at the court of law. I would like to note immediately
I have no doubt that Sefilyan, Malkhasyan and Aroyan are political
prisoners. Aroyan's weapons would never be found if there was no need
to concoct Sefilyan's and Malkhasyan's case. Or nobody would ever try
to "reveal" Jirair Sefilyan's revolver which is allegedly illegal,
according to Sefilyan and his friends, an absolutely legal gift
from the commander of the NKR army Samvel Babayan. This is not the
problem. The case is obviously political. Perhaps it is worthwhile to
focus on the civil aspect of the problem. Therefore, Vahan Aroyan's
pronouncement seems rather interesting, which is much deeper than
just a plea of guilt or self-criticism.
"As a citizen I plead guilty, as a fidayi I don't." It appears from
this pronouncement that a fidayi is not a citizen. And the question
occurs right away how many people in Armenia and Karabakh who fought
in the war in Karabakh consider themselves as fidayis and consequently
they think they can do things a citizen cannot. Assuming that Vahan
Aroyan is the victim of the political situation, we must nevertheless
admit that the current political situation is the consequence of the
thinking Vahan Aroyan shares. In other words, over the past 15 years of
independence of Armenia the factor of the fighters has constantly been
manipulated to stand above the society and the citizens. For instance,
when Robert Kocharyan was running for presidency in 1998 and 2003, his
campaign involved a lot of military clothing, guns, his participation
in the war in Karabakh was mentioned often as an advantage over his
opponents, first the father than the son Demirchyans.
Apart from the division of political influence, the factor of war
underlay the economic distribution. All the field commanders, even
the generals of "tarmac" who wore the military clothing for at least
ten days running in the years of war became owners of some sector of
the economy. "As a citizen I plead guilty, as a fidayi I don't." Any
general can assert this who owns, for instance, all the fixed-route
bus lines to the region of Armavir. He can say as a citizen he does
not have the right to monopolize all the fixed-route bus lines but as
a fidayi he earned that right. Or as a citizen, the government does
not have the right to forgive General Manvel's son, but as the son of
a fidayi he earned the right to teach lessons to the public. This is a
highly dangerous way of thinking which might very often push people to
commit illegal actions because they are convinced that they have rights
others do not have because they participated in the liberation war.
The participants of the liberation war certainly deserve attention,
social allowances. But regarding civic rights and duties, nobody can
have advantages over the other citizens. In this case, the phenomenon
is concerned rather than Vahan Aroyan. Vahan Aroyan is just another
victim of this phenomenon, the victim of the reality that stems from
this thinking, who is neither the first nor the last.