Tweet
Tert, Armenia
Sept 19 2009
Levon Ter-Petrossian Will Not Announce His Candidacy If¦
16:36 ¢ 19.09.09
In the concluding part of his speech yesterday, touching upon the
Nagorno-Karabakh issue, Levon Ter-Petrossian expressed a way out of
the situation.
`The events, of course, would have developed quite differently, had
Nagorno-Karabakh's leadership, in response to the alarm call the
Armenian National Congress (HAK) had made at one time, protected
Karabakh's status as a negotiating party (based on a decision made at
the OSCE Summit in Budapest) and prohibited Armenia's governing
authorities to act in its name. But that didn't happen, and in order
to come out of an awkward situation, Nagorno-Karabakh's leadership, in
the conflict settlement process, found it sufficient to make
statements on the necessity of its participation, which were
statements of principle only outwardly; in reality, they were
empty. Nagorno-Karabakh's officials and political figures like
repeating, without rhyme or reason, that they believe Serzh Sargsyan
and that they are convinced he will not sign a document or, in their
words, will not give up Nagorno-Karbakh. Belief, of course, is a
feeling worthy of respect, but, unfortunately, it is not a political
category,' Levon Ter-Petrossian said.
The opposition leader stated Serzh Sargsyan couldn't have presented
the entire contents of the settlement plan to Nagorno-Karabakh's
leadership in detail.
`Therefore, if in the instance of being informed, Nagorno-Karabakh's
leadership doesn't take any serious steps to prevent the undesirable
solution of their own issue, that means they agree with the
solution. If, however, they don't agree, and at the same time, they
don't want to be opposed to Serzh Sargsyan, that's worse; it means
what's more important for them is not Karabakh's fate, but rather
preserving Karabakh's clan authorities in Armenia.'
In Levon Ter-Petrossian's opinion, Serzh Sargsyan's resignation, the
reinstating of constitutional order in Armenia and forming a
legitimate government would have much more significance in changing
the unfavourable course of settling the Nagorno-Karabakh issue.
`A change of authority may occur in two cases. The first, and the
least harsh, way is Sargsyan's resignation of his own will. There are
rumours floating around among Armenian and Nagorno-Karabakh official
circles that, irrespective of how Sargysan behaves and what he says,
he won't sign a single document. If, nevertheless, he is obliged to
sign, he will hand in his resignation. Some people insist that
Sargsyan himself has stated numerous times in his talks his intention
to resign in case of an unacceptable settlement of
Nagorno-Karabakh. All the same, those rumours have no basis, in my
opinion, and are circulated only with the purpose to dispel the fears,
if only temporarily, of those concerned with Karabakh's fate. Sargsyan
has got so tangled up in his net of responsibilities before the
international community so that they may recognize his legitimacy,
that even with the greatest will [in the world], he cannot but sign
the final agreement put before him.
`The other way for a change in government is Serzh Sargsyan's
compulsory resignation, which may take place in the case of a
nation-wide immense and long-lasting protest. As I tried to explain by
thorough analysis on September 21, 2008, the Armenian National
Congress (HAK) is unable to solve the issue alone. It is a fact that
HAK is the only political organization in Armenia which has clearly
stated and consistently demanded Serzh Sargsyan's resignation and
extraordinary parliamentary and presidential elections should be
held. No one else has come forward with such a demand yet. It could be
understood in some way, in so far as the change in authority was only
viewed as an inner political issue aimed at reinstating the
Constitutional order, with which many could disagree. But it is
completely incomprehensible when Nagorno-Karabakh's fate is directly
dependent on it. So, it remains to conclude, the other political
forces neither need democracy nor
Nagorno-Karabakh,' Levon Ter-Petrossian said.
At the end of his speech, Ter-Petrossian answered the question why in
such a situation the Congress's critics don't incite the nation in
order to put an end to the doubts once and for all. His response?
`A. The Armenian National Congress doesn't need an authority gained by
losing Nagorno-Karabakh.
B. I am not going to announce my candidacy in case Sargsyan resigns as
president, excluding the case that Kocharian announces his
[candidacy].
C. I have considered myself only an instrument in recovering
Constitutional order in Armenia and I am ready to play that role till
the end.'
Tert.am
Sept 19 2009
Levon Ter-Petrossian Will Not Announce His Candidacy If¦
16:36 ¢ 19.09.09
In the concluding part of his speech yesterday, touching upon the
Nagorno-Karabakh issue, Levon Ter-Petrossian expressed a way out of
the situation.
`The events, of course, would have developed quite differently, had
Nagorno-Karabakh's leadership, in response to the alarm call the
Armenian National Congress (HAK) had made at one time, protected
Karabakh's status as a negotiating party (based on a decision made at
the OSCE Summit in Budapest) and prohibited Armenia's governing
authorities to act in its name. But that didn't happen, and in order
to come out of an awkward situation, Nagorno-Karabakh's leadership, in
the conflict settlement process, found it sufficient to make
statements on the necessity of its participation, which were
statements of principle only outwardly; in reality, they were
empty. Nagorno-Karabakh's officials and political figures like
repeating, without rhyme or reason, that they believe Serzh Sargsyan
and that they are convinced he will not sign a document or, in their
words, will not give up Nagorno-Karbakh. Belief, of course, is a
feeling worthy of respect, but, unfortunately, it is not a political
category,' Levon Ter-Petrossian said.
The opposition leader stated Serzh Sargsyan couldn't have presented
the entire contents of the settlement plan to Nagorno-Karabakh's
leadership in detail.
`Therefore, if in the instance of being informed, Nagorno-Karabakh's
leadership doesn't take any serious steps to prevent the undesirable
solution of their own issue, that means they agree with the
solution. If, however, they don't agree, and at the same time, they
don't want to be opposed to Serzh Sargsyan, that's worse; it means
what's more important for them is not Karabakh's fate, but rather
preserving Karabakh's clan authorities in Armenia.'
In Levon Ter-Petrossian's opinion, Serzh Sargsyan's resignation, the
reinstating of constitutional order in Armenia and forming a
legitimate government would have much more significance in changing
the unfavourable course of settling the Nagorno-Karabakh issue.
`A change of authority may occur in two cases. The first, and the
least harsh, way is Sargsyan's resignation of his own will. There are
rumours floating around among Armenian and Nagorno-Karabakh official
circles that, irrespective of how Sargysan behaves and what he says,
he won't sign a single document. If, nevertheless, he is obliged to
sign, he will hand in his resignation. Some people insist that
Sargsyan himself has stated numerous times in his talks his intention
to resign in case of an unacceptable settlement of
Nagorno-Karabakh. All the same, those rumours have no basis, in my
opinion, and are circulated only with the purpose to dispel the fears,
if only temporarily, of those concerned with Karabakh's fate. Sargsyan
has got so tangled up in his net of responsibilities before the
international community so that they may recognize his legitimacy,
that even with the greatest will [in the world], he cannot but sign
the final agreement put before him.
`The other way for a change in government is Serzh Sargsyan's
compulsory resignation, which may take place in the case of a
nation-wide immense and long-lasting protest. As I tried to explain by
thorough analysis on September 21, 2008, the Armenian National
Congress (HAK) is unable to solve the issue alone. It is a fact that
HAK is the only political organization in Armenia which has clearly
stated and consistently demanded Serzh Sargsyan's resignation and
extraordinary parliamentary and presidential elections should be
held. No one else has come forward with such a demand yet. It could be
understood in some way, in so far as the change in authority was only
viewed as an inner political issue aimed at reinstating the
Constitutional order, with which many could disagree. But it is
completely incomprehensible when Nagorno-Karabakh's fate is directly
dependent on it. So, it remains to conclude, the other political
forces neither need democracy nor
Nagorno-Karabakh,' Levon Ter-Petrossian said.
At the end of his speech, Ter-Petrossian answered the question why in
such a situation the Congress's critics don't incite the nation in
order to put an end to the doubts once and for all. His response?
`A. The Armenian National Congress doesn't need an authority gained by
losing Nagorno-Karabakh.
B. I am not going to announce my candidacy in case Sargsyan resigns as
president, excluding the case that Kocharian announces his
[candidacy].
C. I have considered myself only an instrument in recovering
Constitutional order in Armenia and I am ready to play that role till
the end.'
Tert.am