Tweet
Lragir, Armenia
Jan 17 2008
A LOT OF ARMENIAN STATES
The recurrent stage of struggle inside the SIM Party (Constitutional
Right Union) in one of the streets of Yerevan is evidence to the
imperfection of the political sphere of Armenia, the absence of
political culture and traditions. What is going on inside the SIM
Party? In the long run, it is a local battle for power, when one wing
of the party fights the other for the leadership of the party. Many
people who tracked news about this struggle that had started in the
pre-parliamentary election period supposed and even argued that SIM
is just another party which the ruling elite of Armenia is trying to
divide to reduce by one its political opponents, opposition forces on
the eve of the parliamentary election. Presently, too, the resumed
conflict inside the SIM Party is believed to be the government's
scheme.
There seems to be no definite evidence to this scheme. The statements
about government's scheme are only suppositions. And since there are
only suppositions, ostensibly in reality the doubts about the
government are not based on an unbiased and sober evaluation but are
evidence to the social syndrome of taking the easy and irresponsible
track when the wrongdoer is looked for anywhere but among themselves,
when everyone and everything is blamed for one's own failure except
for oneself. This is a social way of thinking and is found not only
in the political sphere but anywhere else. Although this thinking did
not occur out of nowhere but originated from the behavior and
government which the ruling elite has had at different times, in
independent, semi-independent or invaded Armenias.
Therefore, it is natural that they are blaming the government for
political splits. It also favors splinter groups to have people
believe that it is the government rather than their thoughtlessness
and shortsightedness. Despite respect for the SIM Party, it is
difficult to believe that this party is such a powerful resource and
poses such a threat as the presidential election is drawing nearer
that the government attacked to guarantee itself from unpredictable
developments. The role of the government should not be ruled out, but
no government is able to divide a party if in setting up a party the
founders did not pursue the local satisfaction of their own
ambitions, that is ensuring political power on at least a group of
people in the country and becoming a cult for a group but also
established a truly democratic, competitive system.
The government may only make use of this possibility, which the
leaders of parties offer through the physical structure and, most
importantly, the relations inside their parties. These relations are
similar to the ones relating the government against which the
opposition parties are allegedly struggling. It is impossible to
struggle for a democratic state with a non-democratic party. It is
impossible to struggle for reforming the country if you have deprived
the members of our party of the mechanisms of reform. These
mechanisms are not laid at the basis of any party. In any party of
Armenia, even if it has a formal democratic structure, like the
government of Armenia, only its form is democratic, whereas in
reality only the autocratic leader's will has effect. It is natural
that in case of a split they either have to struggle against the
leader of the party and oust him or to leave. In other words, to do a
revolution inside the party or to set up a new party and become its
king.
Believe me if setting up a state were as easy as setting up a party,
there would be as many Armenian states in the world as opposition
activists in Armenia. On the one hand, it would not be so bad but, on
the other hand, it is clear that the situation in each state would be
the same as in the original.
HAKOB BADALYAN
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Jan 17 2008
A LOT OF ARMENIAN STATES
The recurrent stage of struggle inside the SIM Party (Constitutional
Right Union) in one of the streets of Yerevan is evidence to the
imperfection of the political sphere of Armenia, the absence of
political culture and traditions. What is going on inside the SIM
Party? In the long run, it is a local battle for power, when one wing
of the party fights the other for the leadership of the party. Many
people who tracked news about this struggle that had started in the
pre-parliamentary election period supposed and even argued that SIM
is just another party which the ruling elite of Armenia is trying to
divide to reduce by one its political opponents, opposition forces on
the eve of the parliamentary election. Presently, too, the resumed
conflict inside the SIM Party is believed to be the government's
scheme.
There seems to be no definite evidence to this scheme. The statements
about government's scheme are only suppositions. And since there are
only suppositions, ostensibly in reality the doubts about the
government are not based on an unbiased and sober evaluation but are
evidence to the social syndrome of taking the easy and irresponsible
track when the wrongdoer is looked for anywhere but among themselves,
when everyone and everything is blamed for one's own failure except
for oneself. This is a social way of thinking and is found not only
in the political sphere but anywhere else. Although this thinking did
not occur out of nowhere but originated from the behavior and
government which the ruling elite has had at different times, in
independent, semi-independent or invaded Armenias.
Therefore, it is natural that they are blaming the government for
political splits. It also favors splinter groups to have people
believe that it is the government rather than their thoughtlessness
and shortsightedness. Despite respect for the SIM Party, it is
difficult to believe that this party is such a powerful resource and
poses such a threat as the presidential election is drawing nearer
that the government attacked to guarantee itself from unpredictable
developments. The role of the government should not be ruled out, but
no government is able to divide a party if in setting up a party the
founders did not pursue the local satisfaction of their own
ambitions, that is ensuring political power on at least a group of
people in the country and becoming a cult for a group but also
established a truly democratic, competitive system.
The government may only make use of this possibility, which the
leaders of parties offer through the physical structure and, most
importantly, the relations inside their parties. These relations are
similar to the ones relating the government against which the
opposition parties are allegedly struggling. It is impossible to
struggle for a democratic state with a non-democratic party. It is
impossible to struggle for reforming the country if you have deprived
the members of our party of the mechanisms of reform. These
mechanisms are not laid at the basis of any party. In any party of
Armenia, even if it has a formal democratic structure, like the
government of Armenia, only its form is democratic, whereas in
reality only the autocratic leader's will has effect. It is natural
that in case of a split they either have to struggle against the
leader of the party and oust him or to leave. In other words, to do a
revolution inside the party or to set up a new party and become its
king.
Believe me if setting up a state were as easy as setting up a party,
there would be as many Armenian states in the world as opposition
activists in Armenia. On the one hand, it would not be so bad but, on
the other hand, it is clear that the situation in each state would be
the same as in the original.
HAKOB BADALYAN
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress