Tweet
NO BASES FOR DIALOGUE
Gevorg Harutyunyan
Hayots Ashkhar Daily
Published on April 24, 2008
Armenia
Political Secretary of "Dashink" party, which was liquidated and later
joined "Ramkavar" party, Andranik Tevanyan, is the interlocutor of
"Hayots Ashkharh" daily.
"At the moment society is so tensed that even impartial evaluations
and actual realities are perceived subjectively. It is very difficult
to express any idea. I assess our internal political and economic
situation as close to critical. The pre-election and post-election
events didn't create and atmosphere of solidarity, on the contrary
they arouse social polarization.
To understand the reason of the tension created in our country after
each election on the state level and especially presidential elections,
we must realize how we usually come to power, handover power and
maintain power in Armenia. Because in our country we still lack the
democratic mechanisms of these processes, it is impossible to provide
people's participation in the before mentioned processes. The thing is,
when we made a transition to the free market economy, from soviet rule,
the system of the private ownership was formed in the wrong way and
immediately appeared in the legal crises, which still continues.
This is the reason why, in parallel with the political developments,
processes of the re-distribution of ownership take place, or at
least is expected. Certain business structures in this condition are
usually subject to pressures, because the right to ownership is not
protected institutionally.
In the system of the combination of authority and ownership, the
authorities usually try to maintain their informal rent on the
ownership. During the elections the authorities are guided by the
principle "everything or nothing" and the pro-oppositional parties
appear in the status "now or never".
"And what is the solution?"
"In Armenia the struggle for power has turned into a life and death
struggle. If the ruling government has to handover power, they can't
have any guarantees that their personal and ownership security will
be provided. The consequence is the crises following each election
process.
Today we speak too much about the radical opposition. In my view it
is the ruling power that is radical in our country. They will never
handover power.
The only way out is the decentralization of the ruling power,
the formation of an open ruling system. Until we have competitive
political relations, we can't expect that the elections will lead to
social solidarity."
"But it was the representatives and the observers of the same
international organizations that assessed our presidential elections
as "unprecedentedly competitive" and the crises arose after one of
the candidates declared himself a President and didn't respond to
the proposals for dialogue."
"I don't think any dialogue is possible between the ruling power and
the candidate that declared himself a President. Actually there are
no bases for dialogue. Ter-Petrosyan continuously states by the press
supporting him that he intends to "struggle to the end". For them
dialogue means: either taking the power or holding new elections. The
ruling power won't agree to any of them. In such circumstances dialogue
is impossible.
Even if we imagine that Levon Ter-Petrosyan accepted the proposal
for dialogue, for this or that reason, those against the authorities,
won't agree to this decision. The only way to mitigate the existing
tension is to make radical reforms.
The forthcoming local self-governmental elections in my view will
turn into the centers of small and big tensions. I don't think there
will be a political rivalry.
All this needs to be changed. Painful reforms are what we need
in reality.
Gevorg Harutyunyan
Hayots Ashkhar Daily
Published on April 24, 2008
Armenia
Political Secretary of "Dashink" party, which was liquidated and later
joined "Ramkavar" party, Andranik Tevanyan, is the interlocutor of
"Hayots Ashkharh" daily.
"At the moment society is so tensed that even impartial evaluations
and actual realities are perceived subjectively. It is very difficult
to express any idea. I assess our internal political and economic
situation as close to critical. The pre-election and post-election
events didn't create and atmosphere of solidarity, on the contrary
they arouse social polarization.
To understand the reason of the tension created in our country after
each election on the state level and especially presidential elections,
we must realize how we usually come to power, handover power and
maintain power in Armenia. Because in our country we still lack the
democratic mechanisms of these processes, it is impossible to provide
people's participation in the before mentioned processes. The thing is,
when we made a transition to the free market economy, from soviet rule,
the system of the private ownership was formed in the wrong way and
immediately appeared in the legal crises, which still continues.
This is the reason why, in parallel with the political developments,
processes of the re-distribution of ownership take place, or at
least is expected. Certain business structures in this condition are
usually subject to pressures, because the right to ownership is not
protected institutionally.
In the system of the combination of authority and ownership, the
authorities usually try to maintain their informal rent on the
ownership. During the elections the authorities are guided by the
principle "everything or nothing" and the pro-oppositional parties
appear in the status "now or never".
"And what is the solution?"
"In Armenia the struggle for power has turned into a life and death
struggle. If the ruling government has to handover power, they can't
have any guarantees that their personal and ownership security will
be provided. The consequence is the crises following each election
process.
Today we speak too much about the radical opposition. In my view it
is the ruling power that is radical in our country. They will never
handover power.
The only way out is the decentralization of the ruling power,
the formation of an open ruling system. Until we have competitive
political relations, we can't expect that the elections will lead to
social solidarity."
"But it was the representatives and the observers of the same
international organizations that assessed our presidential elections
as "unprecedentedly competitive" and the crises arose after one of
the candidates declared himself a President and didn't respond to
the proposals for dialogue."
"I don't think any dialogue is possible between the ruling power and
the candidate that declared himself a President. Actually there are
no bases for dialogue. Ter-Petrosyan continuously states by the press
supporting him that he intends to "struggle to the end". For them
dialogue means: either taking the power or holding new elections. The
ruling power won't agree to any of them. In such circumstances dialogue
is impossible.
Even if we imagine that Levon Ter-Petrosyan accepted the proposal
for dialogue, for this or that reason, those against the authorities,
won't agree to this decision. The only way to mitigate the existing
tension is to make radical reforms.
The forthcoming local self-governmental elections in my view will
turn into the centers of small and big tensions. I don't think there
will be a political rivalry.
All this needs to be changed. Painful reforms are what we need
in reality.