Tweet
WILL ARMY INTERFERE IN INTERNAL AFFAIRS?
Naira Hayrumyan
Lragir.am
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/country25115.html
Published: 13:05:40 - 13/02/2012
The law on the state of emergency was adopted in Armenia according
to which, in certain cases, the authorities can involve the army
in home affairs. Quite "accidentally" the Russian vice-minister of
emergency situations was visiting Armenia on those days who discussed
the establishment of a joint education center with Armenia, and the
Secretary of the Russian National Security Council Nikolay Patrushev
agreed to expand military cooperation between both countries. Again
accidently, last autumn an agreement was reached within the frameworks
of the CSTO to support partner countries in case of states of
emergency.
All these events may not be interrelated but the law on state of
emergency in Armenia must be connected with the CSTO. However, the
adoption of such a law can be a favorable platform for "support"
by the CSTO, if a state of emergency is declared in Armenia and the
army is deployed.
Note that the CSTO has "simplified" the procedure of support: if so far
the CSTO could not interfere in the home affairs of member countries
if other members were against it, now troops can be sent to this or
another CSTO country who asks for help without complications.
In other words, if military situation is declared in Armenia after
the elections, Russia, without asking other CSTO members, may help.
Experts retain this law anti-Constitutional because the army,
according to the Constitution, cannot interfere in internal affairs of
a country. Army is created to defend the country from external enemies,
while for the internal order, there are other forces - the police,
National Security Service and others. But in Armenia the army is a part
of the home political processes. Not only the votes of militaries are
a guarantee to the preservation of the power at elections, but the army
can also become a means to frighten or even repress the protest moods.
It is symptomatic that the law on emergency situations was adopted
by first reading with the voting procedure breach. The ruling party
was unable to ensure quorum and RPA members voted for their absent
colleagues. This story became public but it did not change the
voting exist.
The fact that ruling party was not even afraid of a pre-election
scandal evidences that the Emergency law was very important to them.
Either the ruling party sees no other ways to ensure from "fair
elections" and post-election events, but the involvement of the army,
or it is forced to adopt this law. In the end, Moscow would like to
test the CSTO troops in an "emergency situation" and to show that its
troops exist not only for military exercises but they are a real force.
In this situation, the position of the Armenian leadership is very
important. If it treats the power's opponents as the enemies of
the nation which should be fought by weapons, then the army would
certainly take part in the post-election events without this law too.
But if the leadership of the army respects the Constitution and does
not treat the acting power as constant, it should become the main
opponent of the adoption of this law.
From: Baghdasarian
Naira Hayrumyan
Lragir.am
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/country25115.html
Published: 13:05:40 - 13/02/2012
The law on the state of emergency was adopted in Armenia according
to which, in certain cases, the authorities can involve the army
in home affairs. Quite "accidentally" the Russian vice-minister of
emergency situations was visiting Armenia on those days who discussed
the establishment of a joint education center with Armenia, and the
Secretary of the Russian National Security Council Nikolay Patrushev
agreed to expand military cooperation between both countries. Again
accidently, last autumn an agreement was reached within the frameworks
of the CSTO to support partner countries in case of states of
emergency.
All these events may not be interrelated but the law on state of
emergency in Armenia must be connected with the CSTO. However, the
adoption of such a law can be a favorable platform for "support"
by the CSTO, if a state of emergency is declared in Armenia and the
army is deployed.
Note that the CSTO has "simplified" the procedure of support: if so far
the CSTO could not interfere in the home affairs of member countries
if other members were against it, now troops can be sent to this or
another CSTO country who asks for help without complications.
In other words, if military situation is declared in Armenia after
the elections, Russia, without asking other CSTO members, may help.
Experts retain this law anti-Constitutional because the army,
according to the Constitution, cannot interfere in internal affairs of
a country. Army is created to defend the country from external enemies,
while for the internal order, there are other forces - the police,
National Security Service and others. But in Armenia the army is a part
of the home political processes. Not only the votes of militaries are
a guarantee to the preservation of the power at elections, but the army
can also become a means to frighten or even repress the protest moods.
It is symptomatic that the law on emergency situations was adopted
by first reading with the voting procedure breach. The ruling party
was unable to ensure quorum and RPA members voted for their absent
colleagues. This story became public but it did not change the
voting exist.
The fact that ruling party was not even afraid of a pre-election
scandal evidences that the Emergency law was very important to them.
Either the ruling party sees no other ways to ensure from "fair
elections" and post-election events, but the involvement of the army,
or it is forced to adopt this law. In the end, Moscow would like to
test the CSTO troops in an "emergency situation" and to show that its
troops exist not only for military exercises but they are a real force.
In this situation, the position of the Armenian leadership is very
important. If it treats the power's opponents as the enemies of
the nation which should be fought by weapons, then the army would
certainly take part in the post-election events without this law too.
But if the leadership of the army respects the Constitution and does
not treat the acting power as constant, it should become the main
opponent of the adoption of this law.
From: Baghdasarian