Tweet
WHO REPRESENTS THE SOCIETY
Lragir.am
10 Aug 06
There are four main sectors in the public and political life, which
represent the interests of the society: government, opposition, the
media and NGOs. Aghasi Yenokyan, political scientist, says two of these
sectors, namely the government and opposition are not legitimate. The
media and NGOs remain. "However, we can see that the media are weak for
one reason or another, or mostly serve different government groups, and
the NGOs simply avoid fulfilling these functions," said the political
scientist in an interview with the Lragir. He says it means that the
public opinion is not represented anywhere in Armenia. Aghasi Yenokyan
mentioned that the consequence is that it is becoming impossible to
conduct a policy, which is in public interests, because "this opinion
is not expressed in any way". The political scientist thinks this is
the reason why the public is indifferent towards politics, and "the
sphere of public opinion is left to a small group which represents
the government, the opposition, the media and the NGOs", becoming an
"underlying" factor of stagnation in Armenia.
Mr. Yenokyan, what is the role of NGOs in the ongoing process in
Armenia, and do they fulfill their role?
Aghasi Yenokyan: The roles of NGOs in countries with developed
democracy and in countries with developing democracy are different.
In developed democracies, NGOs usually assume pursuing the interests
of the sectors, where either it is not expedient for the government
to pursue interests or simply the government is unable to solve
these problems. In developing democracies, the goal is different. In
countries with developing democracy, the goal of NGOs is to promote
democracy. What is the problem? The problem is that NGOs, in fact,
pursue the interests of vulnerable groups, whereas in non-democratic
countries the entire society is vulnerable. In the countries where
the government does not represent the public, at least the NGOs should
represent the public.
Do the NGOs in Armenia represent the public, the interests of the
public?
Aghasi Yenokyan: The NGOs of Armenia are rather serious, certain
NGOs get rather serious funding to solve certain problems, implement
projects. Today, however, I can see that the activity of these
organizations in Armenia is not leading to what we anticipate.
Why, what is the reason that the NGOs work but fail to live up to
the expectations?
Aghasi Yenokyan: Perhaps, the problem is that NGOs are rather
conformists. The NGOs try not to become politicized because
politicization may be a setback for their mandate, in other words,
their type for which they get the grants. This is one reason, the
reluctance to become politicized. The second reason is that NGOs
mostly seek for foreign funding.
There is no local funding. In other words, the local rich people
do not think there are problems in the society and there is point
in turning to NGOs to solve these problems. Even if there is local
funding, budget funding or almost budget funding, it is mainly meant
to create an imitation of NGOs, purely governmental ones, and it may
sound funny, to fund governmental non-governmental organizations. We
can even see that there are NGOs under almost all the government
agencies, whose purpose is to compete with more or less active NGOs
for funding, and get foreign grants, and when necessity arises,
and the government needs to present the public sector, these NGOs
are presented. In other words, we can say that the NGOs are busy
with their problems, which basically differ from the problems of the
society. In other words, the function of NGOs to assume the role of
a legitimate representative of the society is not fulfilled.
And what should be done to fulfill this function?
Aghasi Yenokyan: I think that we have slightly different expectations
from NGOs. We expect NGOs to be politically active, whereas it is not
a function of NGOs, or at least it is not one of the functions the
NGOs assign themselves to. So, the first aspect is that it is wrong
to expect much from NGOs. The second is that efforts should be made
to politicize NGOs slightly. I can present cases when the NGOs did a
good job, they did little work which, however, broke the ice. I can
underline the work of NGOs after the events of April 2004. In other
words, on the one hand, we must not demand much from NGOs, and on
the other hand, we must try to politicize them, because you know the
society in Armenia is politicized. There is no middle in the society,
there is white and there is black. If the NGOs try to become middle,
this middle becomes their job, which is not needed by either the
white or the black. They are needed by themselves only.
And if the NGO represents the public interest, will it get more
funding from the international donor? Or do we deal with the NGO
- international donor - government triangle, which works on an
arrangement?
Aghasi Yenokyan: You know I wouldn't like to dwell on these grant
mechanisms. Of course, they will not give them more money, because
these funds are limited. If the NGO operates normally, they will
give the money, if not, they will not give anything. There is no more
or less. On the other hand, the NGOs get grants for problems, which
are set outside, and do not always correspond to the key issues of
Armenia. Hence, on the one hand, they encourage these organizations
in an attempt to turn them into factors in the public life, but the
public life is political life now, and they do not become a factor
in the political life. In other words, hence they fail to fulfill
their function and represent the interests of the entire society.
So, it appears that the sector of NGOs in Armenia mainly serves to
distract the attention of the public.
Aghasi Yenokyan: I would not like to say that this approach of
theirs was predetermined. The reality is, however, that the NGOs
are fulfilling such a role. We may assert this by combining a series
of conditions.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Lragir.am
10 Aug 06
There are four main sectors in the public and political life, which
represent the interests of the society: government, opposition, the
media and NGOs. Aghasi Yenokyan, political scientist, says two of these
sectors, namely the government and opposition are not legitimate. The
media and NGOs remain. "However, we can see that the media are weak for
one reason or another, or mostly serve different government groups, and
the NGOs simply avoid fulfilling these functions," said the political
scientist in an interview with the Lragir. He says it means that the
public opinion is not represented anywhere in Armenia. Aghasi Yenokyan
mentioned that the consequence is that it is becoming impossible to
conduct a policy, which is in public interests, because "this opinion
is not expressed in any way". The political scientist thinks this is
the reason why the public is indifferent towards politics, and "the
sphere of public opinion is left to a small group which represents
the government, the opposition, the media and the NGOs", becoming an
"underlying" factor of stagnation in Armenia.
Mr. Yenokyan, what is the role of NGOs in the ongoing process in
Armenia, and do they fulfill their role?
Aghasi Yenokyan: The roles of NGOs in countries with developed
democracy and in countries with developing democracy are different.
In developed democracies, NGOs usually assume pursuing the interests
of the sectors, where either it is not expedient for the government
to pursue interests or simply the government is unable to solve
these problems. In developing democracies, the goal is different. In
countries with developing democracy, the goal of NGOs is to promote
democracy. What is the problem? The problem is that NGOs, in fact,
pursue the interests of vulnerable groups, whereas in non-democratic
countries the entire society is vulnerable. In the countries where
the government does not represent the public, at least the NGOs should
represent the public.
Do the NGOs in Armenia represent the public, the interests of the
public?
Aghasi Yenokyan: The NGOs of Armenia are rather serious, certain
NGOs get rather serious funding to solve certain problems, implement
projects. Today, however, I can see that the activity of these
organizations in Armenia is not leading to what we anticipate.
Why, what is the reason that the NGOs work but fail to live up to
the expectations?
Aghasi Yenokyan: Perhaps, the problem is that NGOs are rather
conformists. The NGOs try not to become politicized because
politicization may be a setback for their mandate, in other words,
their type for which they get the grants. This is one reason, the
reluctance to become politicized. The second reason is that NGOs
mostly seek for foreign funding.
There is no local funding. In other words, the local rich people
do not think there are problems in the society and there is point
in turning to NGOs to solve these problems. Even if there is local
funding, budget funding or almost budget funding, it is mainly meant
to create an imitation of NGOs, purely governmental ones, and it may
sound funny, to fund governmental non-governmental organizations. We
can even see that there are NGOs under almost all the government
agencies, whose purpose is to compete with more or less active NGOs
for funding, and get foreign grants, and when necessity arises,
and the government needs to present the public sector, these NGOs
are presented. In other words, we can say that the NGOs are busy
with their problems, which basically differ from the problems of the
society. In other words, the function of NGOs to assume the role of
a legitimate representative of the society is not fulfilled.
And what should be done to fulfill this function?
Aghasi Yenokyan: I think that we have slightly different expectations
from NGOs. We expect NGOs to be politically active, whereas it is not
a function of NGOs, or at least it is not one of the functions the
NGOs assign themselves to. So, the first aspect is that it is wrong
to expect much from NGOs. The second is that efforts should be made
to politicize NGOs slightly. I can present cases when the NGOs did a
good job, they did little work which, however, broke the ice. I can
underline the work of NGOs after the events of April 2004. In other
words, on the one hand, we must not demand much from NGOs, and on
the other hand, we must try to politicize them, because you know the
society in Armenia is politicized. There is no middle in the society,
there is white and there is black. If the NGOs try to become middle,
this middle becomes their job, which is not needed by either the
white or the black. They are needed by themselves only.
And if the NGO represents the public interest, will it get more
funding from the international donor? Or do we deal with the NGO
- international donor - government triangle, which works on an
arrangement?
Aghasi Yenokyan: You know I wouldn't like to dwell on these grant
mechanisms. Of course, they will not give them more money, because
these funds are limited. If the NGO operates normally, they will
give the money, if not, they will not give anything. There is no more
or less. On the other hand, the NGOs get grants for problems, which
are set outside, and do not always correspond to the key issues of
Armenia. Hence, on the one hand, they encourage these organizations
in an attempt to turn them into factors in the public life, but the
public life is political life now, and they do not become a factor
in the political life. In other words, hence they fail to fulfill
their function and represent the interests of the entire society.
So, it appears that the sector of NGOs in Armenia mainly serves to
distract the attention of the public.
Aghasi Yenokyan: I would not like to say that this approach of
theirs was predetermined. The reality is, however, that the NGOs
are fulfilling such a role. We may assert this by combining a series
of conditions.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress