Tweet
WHAT MUST BE CHANGED IN OUR COUNTRY
Naira Hayrumyan
Lragir.am
12 Sept 2007
The country expects changes. They expect new people in government who
will work in a new way. However, before starting anew it is necessary
to evaluate the past to know what needs to be changed. Certainly,
it is something that a think tank should deal with - to evaluate the
foreign, economic and social policies of the government over the past
decade. However, now we can already analyze what we can see with the
naked eye.
Over the past decade Karabakh has had regress regarding the foreign
policies. The NKR representatives do not take part in the talks, and
the conflict started to be viewed as a confrontation between Armenia
and Azerbaijan. The international mediators and the Armenian government
demonstrate that they do not make decisions without consulting the
Karabakh authorities. However, these do not replace full participation
of Karabakh in the talks.
The positive thing is the continuation of the cease-fire, as well as
the fact that Karabakh proved capable of existing independently and
even developing. The negative thing is too much dependence on Armenia
in foreign policies, passivity in information policies. Karabakh
has become a tacit space, and anyone except its citizens attends to
its fate.
In home policies too, there are two tendencies. The positive thing is
the full reconstruction within a few years after the devastating war.
All the infrastructures work - roads, energy, services. In addition,
new branches of economy emerged - mining and tourism. Apartments,
schools and hospitals are being built.
The negative thing is that despite having declared a liberal economy
the government continues to make most decisions. At martial law it
helps control economy and social problems, but this approach also
deprives many people of equal opportunities to run business.
Independent businessmen are highly dependent on government consumption,
tax officers, monopolies, regional "shadow" projects and the favor
of the government.
The negative thing about the economic policy is the lessening of
investments, which is due to the high risk, as well as the weakening
confidence of the Diaspora in the transitions in Karabakh.
In state building, there is considerable progress. In particular,
all the basic institutions of public administration have been shaped,
elections are held, the government agencies operate. The negative
thing about this is the deficiency of the democratic transition:
democratic institutions exist whereas the mechanisms which connect
them often fail. In particular, there is a parliament but it does not
perform a real supervising function. There are courts but they are
not perceived as arbiters of justice. There are a number of newspapers
but the public opinion does not shape public policies.
Each of the abovementioned disadvantages and advantages has its cause
and mechanism of existence. A realistic evaluation of the situation,
departure from political and personal interests and the desire to
build a normal country may become the basis for the activities of
the new government.
Very often the shortcomings in our life are explained by the absence
of a national doctrine, ideology. An average person cannot understand
what a national strategy is. He or she instinctively knows that the
goal of any government should be guaranteeing security of its citizens
in a definite territory, providing equal opportunities for life and
economic prosperity, as well as protecting the rights and dignity of
everyone. The goal of the government is to give a person freedom to
live and work without shortening other people's freedom.
Unfortunately, the government often fails on its main function.
Moreover, it abuses its power to improve its own life. And it forgets
that it is supposed to serve people who share common interests in
the given territory.
And with regard to changes, the upcoming reforms should be viewed in
this light: the government must focus on man, the official must respect
a person. Will the president be able to get the public administration
work in this way? If yes, the reforms will be successful, and life
will improve. Meanwhile, if the government's attitude toward people
remains the same, many will feel deceived.
Naira Hayrumyan
Lragir.am
12 Sept 2007
The country expects changes. They expect new people in government who
will work in a new way. However, before starting anew it is necessary
to evaluate the past to know what needs to be changed. Certainly,
it is something that a think tank should deal with - to evaluate the
foreign, economic and social policies of the government over the past
decade. However, now we can already analyze what we can see with the
naked eye.
Over the past decade Karabakh has had regress regarding the foreign
policies. The NKR representatives do not take part in the talks, and
the conflict started to be viewed as a confrontation between Armenia
and Azerbaijan. The international mediators and the Armenian government
demonstrate that they do not make decisions without consulting the
Karabakh authorities. However, these do not replace full participation
of Karabakh in the talks.
The positive thing is the continuation of the cease-fire, as well as
the fact that Karabakh proved capable of existing independently and
even developing. The negative thing is too much dependence on Armenia
in foreign policies, passivity in information policies. Karabakh
has become a tacit space, and anyone except its citizens attends to
its fate.
In home policies too, there are two tendencies. The positive thing is
the full reconstruction within a few years after the devastating war.
All the infrastructures work - roads, energy, services. In addition,
new branches of economy emerged - mining and tourism. Apartments,
schools and hospitals are being built.
The negative thing is that despite having declared a liberal economy
the government continues to make most decisions. At martial law it
helps control economy and social problems, but this approach also
deprives many people of equal opportunities to run business.
Independent businessmen are highly dependent on government consumption,
tax officers, monopolies, regional "shadow" projects and the favor
of the government.
The negative thing about the economic policy is the lessening of
investments, which is due to the high risk, as well as the weakening
confidence of the Diaspora in the transitions in Karabakh.
In state building, there is considerable progress. In particular,
all the basic institutions of public administration have been shaped,
elections are held, the government agencies operate. The negative
thing about this is the deficiency of the democratic transition:
democratic institutions exist whereas the mechanisms which connect
them often fail. In particular, there is a parliament but it does not
perform a real supervising function. There are courts but they are
not perceived as arbiters of justice. There are a number of newspapers
but the public opinion does not shape public policies.
Each of the abovementioned disadvantages and advantages has its cause
and mechanism of existence. A realistic evaluation of the situation,
departure from political and personal interests and the desire to
build a normal country may become the basis for the activities of
the new government.
Very often the shortcomings in our life are explained by the absence
of a national doctrine, ideology. An average person cannot understand
what a national strategy is. He or she instinctively knows that the
goal of any government should be guaranteeing security of its citizens
in a definite territory, providing equal opportunities for life and
economic prosperity, as well as protecting the rights and dignity of
everyone. The goal of the government is to give a person freedom to
live and work without shortening other people's freedom.
Unfortunately, the government often fails on its main function.
Moreover, it abuses its power to improve its own life. And it forgets
that it is supposed to serve people who share common interests in
the given territory.
And with regard to changes, the upcoming reforms should be viewed in
this light: the government must focus on man, the official must respect
a person. Will the president be able to get the public administration
work in this way? If yes, the reforms will be successful, and life
will improve. Meanwhile, if the government's attitude toward people
remains the same, many will feel deceived.