Tweet
NEO-BOLSHEVIKS LEARN A LOT FROM BOLSHEVIKS
Armen Tsatouryan
Hayots Ashkhar Daily
20 Nov 08
Armenia
After the recent regional visit of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs,
the prospects of conflict settlement have somehow become dependent
upon the discussions to be held Armenia and Azerbaijan.
The fact that such discussions in our reality are initiated by
the authorities themselves can be considered quite normal and
conceivable. After all, it is known to everybody that the Karabakh
conflict and the subsequent confrontation with Azerbaijan was the
expression of the collective will of the whole nation vs. a separate
political party or individual. Therefore, regardless the current of the
negotiation process, their approval or rejection cannot be the monopoly
of the state authorities which are in power at the given moment.
Moreover, the present-day authorities' initiative of organizing
discussions with the political forces or the task of uniting the
pan-national efforts for moving forward with any option of settlement
is just what all the Armenian pro-opposition forces have been speaking
about for around 1.5 decade. And all that continued till the moment
when the President of the Republic invited them to discussions over
the Karabakh issue.
And surprising though it is, it was at this moment that the attitudes
of the radical opposition took a turning to the opposite direction.
Now, the leaders of the Armenian Nat ional Congress are developing
the opposite viewpoint, inventing different excuses and refusing
to accept the President's invitation. As to why their excuses are
invented is because neither the Karabakh issue nor the permanent
interests of our state and people can be considered exhausted just
because the pro-opposition figures refuse to admit the results of the
recent presidential elections or find that releasing the individuals
arrested as a result of the March 1-2 incidents is necessary for
initiating a dialogue.
In this respect, A. Z. Sargsyan's refusal to participate in the
discussions over the Karabakh issue cannot but be considered a
primitive argument in the neo-Bolshevik style. "If I am an individual
staging a coup d'état, there's no need to know my opinion." A question
arises as to whether A. Z. Sargsyan has been invited to discuss an
internal political agenda or to express his views on the Karabakh
issue, a problem that unites all of us."
Let me note that discussions over the Karabakh issue were held in our
reality even at the times when there was no electoral system in the
country and Karen Demirtchyan, the First Secretary of the Armenian
Communist Party, invited a number of renowned intellectuals and
listened to their views with attention. And none of these people would
persistently refuse to meet with the First Secretary just because he
had been elected to h is post by the decision of the Political Bureau
of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
Or let's take, for instance, the year 1997, when the outcomes of
the 1996 elections were known to all of us, and the international
community wouldn't accept L. Ter-Petrosyan's legitimacy. However,
that didn't put an end to the discussions over the Karabakh issue
among the political forces and political figures. And such discussions
should continue especially now that the international community no
longer questions the legitimacy of the new Armenian President.
One of the excuses of the opposition is that President S. Sargsyan will
use such discussions as a tool "for showing our national unanimity
to the states interested in the NKR issue, but as a matter of fact,
he will thus avoid responsibility in the negotiations process."
Of course, with the help of the political parties representing them,
the Armenian people are obliged to demonstrate their inflexible will
of achieving the fair solution of the Karabakh issue. After all, if S.
Sargsyan's positions are strengthened in the negotiations, that will
be the victory of the country rather than the authorities.
Whereas it turns out that some people intend to lay the responsibility
on the top representative of the authorities, weaken the positions of
the incumbent President and hence - the Armenian party so as Armenia
will suffer defeat in the diplomatic contest but they will benefit
as a result.
And before that, it is necessary for them to satisfy themselves with L.
Zourabyan's slogan saying "we will support the NKR people".
However, the statement does not provide an answer to the question as
which party such "support" will be directed against: Azerbaijan or
the authorities of his own country.
This is the accurate reproduction of V. I. Lenin's well-known slogan
of achieving the defeat of his own country. These people are making
attempts of attaining a similar result by way of separating the NKR
people from the "blood-sucking leeches", i.e. the representatives of
the authorities of Armenia. That's why "Lenin" has halted the wave
of his demonstrations and gone "underground".
The only difference is that Ilyich had hidden in a modest Finnish
hut where he was dreaming about the defeat of the authorities of
his own country whereas his Armenian adherent lives in a luxurious
palace. But in such circumstances, this is an ordinary detail because
the prospect of the diplomatic defeat of the ruling authorities of
Armenia is, in this case, the same as the defeat of Armenia and the
Armenian people for Karabakh.
Whereas the situation in Azerbaijan, our neighboring country, is just
the contrary. That is, the opposition has set aside the disagreements
with the authorities and in case of the slightest doubts that the
latter are making concessions to the Armenian party, it accuses them
of all the deadly sins. That's the reason the recent statements of the
Azerbaijani statesmen are targeted at the mutual concession clauses
proposed by the OSCE Minsk Group, the idea of the NKR people's right
to self-determination being the central issue.
The picture is exactly the same as the situation with the Armenian
Bolshevik-internationalists and the Azeri "Bolshevik moussavatists"
in the 2nd decade of the past century. Finally, the discussions over
the Karabakh issue in both countries are turning into game in the
direction of one gate, with the defeat of the Armenian diplomacy being
in the interests of not only the political circles of Azerbaijan,
but also a significant part of the Armenian opposition, i.e. the
Ter-Petrosyan-led Armenian National Congress.
The former needs to return Karabakh of which it was deprived in the
battlefield while the latter wants return the power it lost in Armenia.
--Boundary_(ID_jBBWsD8u3JDOvzJ+Q0IHpg)--
Armen Tsatouryan
Hayots Ashkhar Daily
20 Nov 08
Armenia
After the recent regional visit of the OSCE Minsk Group Co-Chairs,
the prospects of conflict settlement have somehow become dependent
upon the discussions to be held Armenia and Azerbaijan.
The fact that such discussions in our reality are initiated by
the authorities themselves can be considered quite normal and
conceivable. After all, it is known to everybody that the Karabakh
conflict and the subsequent confrontation with Azerbaijan was the
expression of the collective will of the whole nation vs. a separate
political party or individual. Therefore, regardless the current of the
negotiation process, their approval or rejection cannot be the monopoly
of the state authorities which are in power at the given moment.
Moreover, the present-day authorities' initiative of organizing
discussions with the political forces or the task of uniting the
pan-national efforts for moving forward with any option of settlement
is just what all the Armenian pro-opposition forces have been speaking
about for around 1.5 decade. And all that continued till the moment
when the President of the Republic invited them to discussions over
the Karabakh issue.
And surprising though it is, it was at this moment that the attitudes
of the radical opposition took a turning to the opposite direction.
Now, the leaders of the Armenian Nat ional Congress are developing
the opposite viewpoint, inventing different excuses and refusing
to accept the President's invitation. As to why their excuses are
invented is because neither the Karabakh issue nor the permanent
interests of our state and people can be considered exhausted just
because the pro-opposition figures refuse to admit the results of the
recent presidential elections or find that releasing the individuals
arrested as a result of the March 1-2 incidents is necessary for
initiating a dialogue.
In this respect, A. Z. Sargsyan's refusal to participate in the
discussions over the Karabakh issue cannot but be considered a
primitive argument in the neo-Bolshevik style. "If I am an individual
staging a coup d'état, there's no need to know my opinion." A question
arises as to whether A. Z. Sargsyan has been invited to discuss an
internal political agenda or to express his views on the Karabakh
issue, a problem that unites all of us."
Let me note that discussions over the Karabakh issue were held in our
reality even at the times when there was no electoral system in the
country and Karen Demirtchyan, the First Secretary of the Armenian
Communist Party, invited a number of renowned intellectuals and
listened to their views with attention. And none of these people would
persistently refuse to meet with the First Secretary just because he
had been elected to h is post by the decision of the Political Bureau
of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
Or let's take, for instance, the year 1997, when the outcomes of
the 1996 elections were known to all of us, and the international
community wouldn't accept L. Ter-Petrosyan's legitimacy. However,
that didn't put an end to the discussions over the Karabakh issue
among the political forces and political figures. And such discussions
should continue especially now that the international community no
longer questions the legitimacy of the new Armenian President.
One of the excuses of the opposition is that President S. Sargsyan will
use such discussions as a tool "for showing our national unanimity
to the states interested in the NKR issue, but as a matter of fact,
he will thus avoid responsibility in the negotiations process."
Of course, with the help of the political parties representing them,
the Armenian people are obliged to demonstrate their inflexible will
of achieving the fair solution of the Karabakh issue. After all, if S.
Sargsyan's positions are strengthened in the negotiations, that will
be the victory of the country rather than the authorities.
Whereas it turns out that some people intend to lay the responsibility
on the top representative of the authorities, weaken the positions of
the incumbent President and hence - the Armenian party so as Armenia
will suffer defeat in the diplomatic contest but they will benefit
as a result.
And before that, it is necessary for them to satisfy themselves with L.
Zourabyan's slogan saying "we will support the NKR people".
However, the statement does not provide an answer to the question as
which party such "support" will be directed against: Azerbaijan or
the authorities of his own country.
This is the accurate reproduction of V. I. Lenin's well-known slogan
of achieving the defeat of his own country. These people are making
attempts of attaining a similar result by way of separating the NKR
people from the "blood-sucking leeches", i.e. the representatives of
the authorities of Armenia. That's why "Lenin" has halted the wave
of his demonstrations and gone "underground".
The only difference is that Ilyich had hidden in a modest Finnish
hut where he was dreaming about the defeat of the authorities of
his own country whereas his Armenian adherent lives in a luxurious
palace. But in such circumstances, this is an ordinary detail because
the prospect of the diplomatic defeat of the ruling authorities of
Armenia is, in this case, the same as the defeat of Armenia and the
Armenian people for Karabakh.
Whereas the situation in Azerbaijan, our neighboring country, is just
the contrary. That is, the opposition has set aside the disagreements
with the authorities and in case of the slightest doubts that the
latter are making concessions to the Armenian party, it accuses them
of all the deadly sins. That's the reason the recent statements of the
Azerbaijani statesmen are targeted at the mutual concession clauses
proposed by the OSCE Minsk Group, the idea of the NKR people's right
to self-determination being the central issue.
The picture is exactly the same as the situation with the Armenian
Bolshevik-internationalists and the Azeri "Bolshevik moussavatists"
in the 2nd decade of the past century. Finally, the discussions over
the Karabakh issue in both countries are turning into game in the
direction of one gate, with the defeat of the Armenian diplomacy being
in the interests of not only the political circles of Azerbaijan,
but also a significant part of the Armenian opposition, i.e. the
Ter-Petrosyan-led Armenian National Congress.
The former needs to return Karabakh of which it was deprived in the
battlefield while the latter wants return the power it lost in Armenia.
--Boundary_(ID_jBBWsD8u3JDOvzJ+Q0IHpg)--