Tweet
`Half a Word About Tigran Sargsyan Doesn't Mean That Sukiasyan Will Be
`Persecuted' Now'
May 10 2013
Vardan Harutyunyan, the manager of the Rights and Freedom Center, on
internal political problems.
* Compared to the powerful popular tide of protests against the government
in 2008, the Armenian opposition is in quite a poor condition, `idling
away' a whole electoral period. The opposition was hardly represented in
the parliament, the main opposition forces didn't participate in the
presidential election, they made elevated political statements about
`taking the Bastille' during the whole mayoral election campaign, as a
result, we have what we have. The political forces have `washed their
hands' with their post-election statements. What is the reason for the
opposition camp's failure; is the government more cynical or perhaps the
oppositionists are less honest with the people?
* The oppositionists are not dishonest. Both in our country and everywhere
else, the opposition takes on a task of criticizing the government for its
shortcomings. What should the Armenian opposition do that they don't? This
government buys votes, fires people for their political orientation,
deprives them of businesses, persecutes and imprisons. I don't think it is
fair to compare the government with the opposition. The opposition won the
2008 presidential election. And it is easy to stand by the winner. People,
even government officials, MPs would come to the square. Let us remember
February 26 when even the people gathered for Serzh Sargsyan's rally came
and joined the opposition. The popular movement was powerful. The
government was not ready to hand over power then, as well as now. And Levon
Ter-Petrossian was and still is against solving issues with force. Long
before the election, in the period of nominating candidates and during the
election campaign, it was already clear that the government was not going
to take into account the election results. And the government started to
use brute force against the opposition that ruled out using force and
intended to act only in accordance with the law, using at first the
taxation office and the police, then the internal troops and the army.
Unprecedented persecutions began, supporters of the opposition candidate
were put into prison, were compelled to hide, leave the country. Well, in
the period of these repressions when the opposition was not the `winner'
any longer, naturally, people left the square and the opposition's office
and the oppositionists. This is both natural and logical. It is so always
and everywhere. It never is otherwise. As a result, the oppositionists
weaken and split. Ours were not able and wouldn't have been able to avoid
these logical developments either. If one cannot solve issues in the short
pre-election period, one should be ready for a long, hard, and exhausting
struggle when the disappointed leave, former supporters curse, and the
supporters defect to the opposite camp. When they blame you for all the
misfortunes. In this case, achieving big success, winning victories every
day becomes difficult or impossible. One is also compelled not to
participate in elections when one weighs the gains and the losses from
participation. As for the Yerevan City Council election, there is not much
to say. In this game called `elections,' politics lost to money. We can
assert that the disgraceful phenomenon of buying votes has finally been
rooted in our country. From now on, it will be this way, and all those who
are preparing for the upcoming elections should take this into account.
* Analyzing the political events that had taken place and were taking
place, Sasun Mikayelyan, an active participant in the popular movement,
said yesterday: `Levon Ter-Petrossian left the powerful army in the square;
he has just started to gather people for three-month maneuvers. And this is
the result.' Does he mean the newly-established party? What role can the
new party that has less influence than the Armenian National Congress (ANC)
Coalition play, in your opinion? * In response to your first question, I
have already stated that if movements cannot achieve success within a very
short period of time, within a few hours or several days, they are
compelled to prepare for a long and hard struggle, the future of which is
often not visible to many people. While talking about the Armenian National
Congress Coalition, one should always remember what ordeals it has gone
through since March 1, 2008. The repressions and persecutions that this
coalition went through are hard to endure. They endured. The people become
excited as quickly as they become disappointed. And this disappointment
brings about many minor and major, solvable and insolvable everyday
problems. The fall of the movement starts. This is normal. And the one who
prepares for a long struggle and realizes the above-mentioned regularity
should create such a system that can endure a long struggle. A party is
such a system. I am not partisan by nature and will not be. However, in the
current situation, I think Ter-Petrossian has found the way of
consolidating his supporters and putting up a long struggle. Time will tell
what results it will yield. The movement that was in the form of the ANC, a
coalition of different parties, had been good, had played an important
part, had played a big part in the country's political life, but such
rumblings had already started inside it that it couldn't last for long.
Either it had played its part already or those who wanted to ruin it had
achieved success. It was high time that they made new decisions. In the
end, instead of criticizing the newly-established political force, one had
better wish it good luck.
* By the way, another active participant in the popular movement, Khachatur
Sukiasyan, said in an interview given to Radio Liberty yesterday that
Tigran Sargsyan was a reformist. Do you agree? * It is hard to call Tigran
Sargsyan `reformist,' but it is an opinion, and the man expressed his
opinion. That part of the conversation has continuation. In response to a
question why Tigran Sargsyan didn't reform then, Khachatur Sukiasyan said
that he thought the political system was to blame for that, not he. This is
a more important idea than calling Tigran Sargsyan `reformist.' Even if T.
Sargsyan was a reformist, he wouldn't be able to reform anything, since the
political system of the country wouldn't allow him to do that. And if a
real reformist was appointed to that office instead of Tigran Sargsyan, he,
coming across the political system mentioned by Khachatur Sukiasyan, would
have to either change and become Tigran Sargsyan or resign. Sukiasyan was
the first businessman who, disregarding real dangers and threats, made his
choice and stood by the movement that was targeted by the government. I
don't think that he didn't realize the gravity of the situation. I am sure
that he made a considered and thought-out decision. As opposed to many
businessmen, considering his public speeches, he has his own conception of
the country's development and economic system, which he clearly expresses
without taking into account whether the government will like it or not. I
haven't heard him regret or change the choice he made at the time, for all
the persecutions against him, his family members, and their businesses. And
half a word or half an idea about Tigran Sargsyan doesn't mean that
Sukiasyan should be `persecuted' in the popular movement.
* A new Cabinet was formed with partial changes among the ministers of the
economic cluster. The ruling Republican Party of Armenia (RPA)
representatives talk about radical changes every day, which we will feel at
first hand. Can the old and new Cabinet make radical changes, using its
whole resource? * Every Cabinet can make radical changes, if it takes on
that task with due seriousness. We come across the above-mentioned system
again? What task does the president assign to the Prime Minister? If he
continues to demand that the Prime Minister ensure that his relatives,
businessmen who `bring votes' for him during elections, specimens who
organized and participated in the events of March 1, the criminals that
`work' for him are above the law, are out of the taxation and customs
systems' sight, if he creates such an atmosphere that even his friends will
offshore their financial means, given the risk of losing them, if the
country's economy continues to be divided into friends and enemies, if the
country's political life remains in the same condition with justice
submitted to the president's will, a poor condition of human rights, and
an
inflated and callous bureaucratic system, there can be no change.
Interviewed NELLY GRIGORYAN Aravot Daily
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2013/05/10/154225/
© 1998 - 2013 Aravot - News from Armenia
`Persecuted' Now'
May 10 2013
Vardan Harutyunyan, the manager of the Rights and Freedom Center, on
internal political problems.
* Compared to the powerful popular tide of protests against the government
in 2008, the Armenian opposition is in quite a poor condition, `idling
away' a whole electoral period. The opposition was hardly represented in
the parliament, the main opposition forces didn't participate in the
presidential election, they made elevated political statements about
`taking the Bastille' during the whole mayoral election campaign, as a
result, we have what we have. The political forces have `washed their
hands' with their post-election statements. What is the reason for the
opposition camp's failure; is the government more cynical or perhaps the
oppositionists are less honest with the people?
* The oppositionists are not dishonest. Both in our country and everywhere
else, the opposition takes on a task of criticizing the government for its
shortcomings. What should the Armenian opposition do that they don't? This
government buys votes, fires people for their political orientation,
deprives them of businesses, persecutes and imprisons. I don't think it is
fair to compare the government with the opposition. The opposition won the
2008 presidential election. And it is easy to stand by the winner. People,
even government officials, MPs would come to the square. Let us remember
February 26 when even the people gathered for Serzh Sargsyan's rally came
and joined the opposition. The popular movement was powerful. The
government was not ready to hand over power then, as well as now. And Levon
Ter-Petrossian was and still is against solving issues with force. Long
before the election, in the period of nominating candidates and during the
election campaign, it was already clear that the government was not going
to take into account the election results. And the government started to
use brute force against the opposition that ruled out using force and
intended to act only in accordance with the law, using at first the
taxation office and the police, then the internal troops and the army.
Unprecedented persecutions began, supporters of the opposition candidate
were put into prison, were compelled to hide, leave the country. Well, in
the period of these repressions when the opposition was not the `winner'
any longer, naturally, people left the square and the opposition's office
and the oppositionists. This is both natural and logical. It is so always
and everywhere. It never is otherwise. As a result, the oppositionists
weaken and split. Ours were not able and wouldn't have been able to avoid
these logical developments either. If one cannot solve issues in the short
pre-election period, one should be ready for a long, hard, and exhausting
struggle when the disappointed leave, former supporters curse, and the
supporters defect to the opposite camp. When they blame you for all the
misfortunes. In this case, achieving big success, winning victories every
day becomes difficult or impossible. One is also compelled not to
participate in elections when one weighs the gains and the losses from
participation. As for the Yerevan City Council election, there is not much
to say. In this game called `elections,' politics lost to money. We can
assert that the disgraceful phenomenon of buying votes has finally been
rooted in our country. From now on, it will be this way, and all those who
are preparing for the upcoming elections should take this into account.
* Analyzing the political events that had taken place and were taking
place, Sasun Mikayelyan, an active participant in the popular movement,
said yesterday: `Levon Ter-Petrossian left the powerful army in the square;
he has just started to gather people for three-month maneuvers. And this is
the result.' Does he mean the newly-established party? What role can the
new party that has less influence than the Armenian National Congress (ANC)
Coalition play, in your opinion? * In response to your first question, I
have already stated that if movements cannot achieve success within a very
short period of time, within a few hours or several days, they are
compelled to prepare for a long and hard struggle, the future of which is
often not visible to many people. While talking about the Armenian National
Congress Coalition, one should always remember what ordeals it has gone
through since March 1, 2008. The repressions and persecutions that this
coalition went through are hard to endure. They endured. The people become
excited as quickly as they become disappointed. And this disappointment
brings about many minor and major, solvable and insolvable everyday
problems. The fall of the movement starts. This is normal. And the one who
prepares for a long struggle and realizes the above-mentioned regularity
should create such a system that can endure a long struggle. A party is
such a system. I am not partisan by nature and will not be. However, in the
current situation, I think Ter-Petrossian has found the way of
consolidating his supporters and putting up a long struggle. Time will tell
what results it will yield. The movement that was in the form of the ANC, a
coalition of different parties, had been good, had played an important
part, had played a big part in the country's political life, but such
rumblings had already started inside it that it couldn't last for long.
Either it had played its part already or those who wanted to ruin it had
achieved success. It was high time that they made new decisions. In the
end, instead of criticizing the newly-established political force, one had
better wish it good luck.
* By the way, another active participant in the popular movement, Khachatur
Sukiasyan, said in an interview given to Radio Liberty yesterday that
Tigran Sargsyan was a reformist. Do you agree? * It is hard to call Tigran
Sargsyan `reformist,' but it is an opinion, and the man expressed his
opinion. That part of the conversation has continuation. In response to a
question why Tigran Sargsyan didn't reform then, Khachatur Sukiasyan said
that he thought the political system was to blame for that, not he. This is
a more important idea than calling Tigran Sargsyan `reformist.' Even if T.
Sargsyan was a reformist, he wouldn't be able to reform anything, since the
political system of the country wouldn't allow him to do that. And if a
real reformist was appointed to that office instead of Tigran Sargsyan, he,
coming across the political system mentioned by Khachatur Sukiasyan, would
have to either change and become Tigran Sargsyan or resign. Sukiasyan was
the first businessman who, disregarding real dangers and threats, made his
choice and stood by the movement that was targeted by the government. I
don't think that he didn't realize the gravity of the situation. I am sure
that he made a considered and thought-out decision. As opposed to many
businessmen, considering his public speeches, he has his own conception of
the country's development and economic system, which he clearly expresses
without taking into account whether the government will like it or not. I
haven't heard him regret or change the choice he made at the time, for all
the persecutions against him, his family members, and their businesses. And
half a word or half an idea about Tigran Sargsyan doesn't mean that
Sukiasyan should be `persecuted' in the popular movement.
* A new Cabinet was formed with partial changes among the ministers of the
economic cluster. The ruling Republican Party of Armenia (RPA)
representatives talk about radical changes every day, which we will feel at
first hand. Can the old and new Cabinet make radical changes, using its
whole resource? * Every Cabinet can make radical changes, if it takes on
that task with due seriousness. We come across the above-mentioned system
again? What task does the president assign to the Prime Minister? If he
continues to demand that the Prime Minister ensure that his relatives,
businessmen who `bring votes' for him during elections, specimens who
organized and participated in the events of March 1, the criminals that
`work' for him are above the law, are out of the taxation and customs
systems' sight, if he creates such an atmosphere that even his friends will
offshore their financial means, given the risk of losing them, if the
country's economy continues to be divided into friends and enemies, if the
country's political life remains in the same condition with justice
submitted to the president's will, a poor condition of human rights, and
an
inflated and callous bureaucratic system, there can be no change.
Interviewed NELLY GRIGORYAN Aravot Daily
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2013/05/10/154225/
© 1998 - 2013 Aravot - News from Armenia