Tweet
THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO LEVON
Lilit Poghosyan
Hayots Ashkhar Daily
04 Sep 2008
Armenia
During his last Press Conference L. Ter-Petrosyan one more time
displayed his skills to manipulate public opinion. He displayed as
he usually says a "classical example".
Particularly in the context of the recent regional developments,
touching upon Karabakh conflict, he expressed hope that whatever
happens in the region we will lose: "It seems on the one hand all
the frozen conflicts are being solved one after another - Kosovo,
South Osatia, Abkhazia, on the other hand this solution doesn't make
the settlement of all the other conflicts easier.
Today I can't express final opinion but I don't exclude that these
precedents can make the settlement of all the other frozen conflicts
much difficult. I mean Karabakh and Trans-Dnestria."
And this is in case when everyone understands that after the precedents
of South Osatia and Abkhazia it is nonsense to speak about "returning"
Karabakh to Azerbaijan or the military "settlement" of the conflict.
In his article "War or Peace" Ter-Petrosyan states that international
law is against us and that "honorable peace", that is to say
the version of Artsakh's "phasal return" to Azerbaijan is our
only salvation. It turned out the leader of Armenian Pan National
Movement has review ed his principled stance of 1998 and he thinks
international law is not a dogma: "On the one hand the principle of
the territorial integrity works, on the other hand the principle
of the right to sovereignty, but in reality both principles don't
work. Only the principle of the expediency works. International law
is for the powerful. As usual the 4-5 superpowers decide the destiny
of the world."
What geopolitical situation will be created, what destiny will Karabakh
have? No one knows! Will the day come when one of the superpowers
will defend Karabakh's right to sovereignty? Not excluded!"
A question arises here, in autumn 1997 what made LTP persistently
speculate the public by representing the invented alternative "War
or Peace".
And if it is not excluded that "similar situation can be created",
doesn't this imply that he was sadly mistaken by insisting on
Azerbaijani version of "honorable peace" and on the contrary,
that Vazgen Sargsyan, Robert Kocharyan, Serge Sargsyan and all the
other followers of the "hard line" were right when they refused the
capitulation program approved by Levon.
Ter-Petrosyan's "observations" regarding the recent developments around
Armenian-Turkish relations were not less important. In response to the
question: "How can you explain the fact that these days our society
approaches with understanding the improvement of our relations with
Turkey, in case when during his years of power they revolted against
any attempts of winning the hearts of Turkish leaders," he said,
"During my years of power there was no public revolt against the
policy I pursued. The public approached my steps with understanding
and tranquility.
If the conversation is about certain extreme expressions made by the
opposition - it is far not public opinion. 90% of society approved
my policy of the relations with Turkey."
Believe me he can even state that 99% of society were happy with the
"constructive" activity of Armenian Pan National Movement and their
anti-democratic manifestations."
Lilit Poghosyan
Hayots Ashkhar Daily
04 Sep 2008
Armenia
During his last Press Conference L. Ter-Petrosyan one more time
displayed his skills to manipulate public opinion. He displayed as
he usually says a "classical example".
Particularly in the context of the recent regional developments,
touching upon Karabakh conflict, he expressed hope that whatever
happens in the region we will lose: "It seems on the one hand all
the frozen conflicts are being solved one after another - Kosovo,
South Osatia, Abkhazia, on the other hand this solution doesn't make
the settlement of all the other conflicts easier.
Today I can't express final opinion but I don't exclude that these
precedents can make the settlement of all the other frozen conflicts
much difficult. I mean Karabakh and Trans-Dnestria."
And this is in case when everyone understands that after the precedents
of South Osatia and Abkhazia it is nonsense to speak about "returning"
Karabakh to Azerbaijan or the military "settlement" of the conflict.
In his article "War or Peace" Ter-Petrosyan states that international
law is against us and that "honorable peace", that is to say
the version of Artsakh's "phasal return" to Azerbaijan is our
only salvation. It turned out the leader of Armenian Pan National
Movement has review ed his principled stance of 1998 and he thinks
international law is not a dogma: "On the one hand the principle of
the territorial integrity works, on the other hand the principle
of the right to sovereignty, but in reality both principles don't
work. Only the principle of the expediency works. International law
is for the powerful. As usual the 4-5 superpowers decide the destiny
of the world."
What geopolitical situation will be created, what destiny will Karabakh
have? No one knows! Will the day come when one of the superpowers
will defend Karabakh's right to sovereignty? Not excluded!"
A question arises here, in autumn 1997 what made LTP persistently
speculate the public by representing the invented alternative "War
or Peace".
And if it is not excluded that "similar situation can be created",
doesn't this imply that he was sadly mistaken by insisting on
Azerbaijani version of "honorable peace" and on the contrary,
that Vazgen Sargsyan, Robert Kocharyan, Serge Sargsyan and all the
other followers of the "hard line" were right when they refused the
capitulation program approved by Levon.
Ter-Petrosyan's "observations" regarding the recent developments around
Armenian-Turkish relations were not less important. In response to the
question: "How can you explain the fact that these days our society
approaches with understanding the improvement of our relations with
Turkey, in case when during his years of power they revolted against
any attempts of winning the hearts of Turkish leaders," he said,
"During my years of power there was no public revolt against the
policy I pursued. The public approached my steps with understanding
and tranquility.
If the conversation is about certain extreme expressions made by the
opposition - it is far not public opinion. 90% of society approved
my policy of the relations with Turkey."
Believe me he can even state that 99% of society were happy with the
"constructive" activity of Armenian Pan National Movement and their
anti-democratic manifestations."