Tweet
MANVEL SARGSYAN: DISSOCIATION OF PEOPLE'S MOVEMENT FROM PARTIES IS A PLEDGE OF DESTRUCTION OF THE OLIGARCHIC SYSTEM OF ARMENIA
by David Stepanyan
arminfo
Wednesday, January 18, 14:10
Interview of Director of Armenian Centre for National and International
studies Manvel Sargsyan with ArmInfo news agency
Can you predict what international events may affect the situation
in Armenia, stemming from the foreign policy situation in the world
in 2011?
The recent developments in Russia have set quite new tasks to
partner-country Armenia. The ruling party in Russia Yedinaya Rossia
swept the parliamentary elections on December 4 causing wide public
discontent. Our leadership has officially congratulated Putin's
party, but no one knows what will happen in Russia tomorrow. It
makes impossible setting long-term goals in the foreign policy of
the country.
The developments and rapid processes in the Middle East and North
Africa that have changed the international situation and positions
of the lead superpowers in the world. These changes are felt also in
Armenia. The attitude of Russia, USA and Europe is very important for
us. But when the global political situation changes, the attitude of
these superpowers towards Armenia changes as well. Armenia can become
absolutely uninteresting to some countries or quite the opposite.
Therefore, it is very hard to predict anything in such uncertain
situation. In Armenia they have announced a policy of rapprochement
with Europe, on the one hand, and there are more and more opinions
that this rapprochement is just idle talks. The contents of NATO IPAP,
EU's Eastern Partnership and other projects are still uncertain. No
one speaks of reality, because the reality is becoming less and less
clear to the disintegrating Europe, much less it is clear to Armenia.
Instability in Syria, the situation around Iran, the threats of Turkey
and Israel, where is this stemming from and what may it result in?
Obviously, 50 years of relative political stability affected all the
countries in the world, and quite sustainable political institutes of
power, for instance, in Arab countries, have turned into rudiments that
began to ruin. This happened as relevant ties, agreements, arrangements
that no longer exist, backed them. So, they proved powerless against
the rapidly changing situation. Thousands of unarmed people in the
Arab countries take to the streets and die for they can no longer
live as they lived before. The external interference is based on
the law of the international relations. When something happens,
every country speaks of its position, and it is normal. For instance,
in the case of Syria, Russia strives to preserve what it has, while
Turkey is trying to gain something.
What regional events may be expected at least in the mid-term prospect,
taking into consideration the growing tension?
I still see growing of instability in the region. It is hard to
predict what it will lead to in the conditions of the modern world. It
is especially relevant taking into consideration the amorphism of
relations between the countries.
Such amorphism in the relations of countries leads to inevitable
atomization. War unleashed by one country can be managed by another.
This amorphism is the key factor restraining the situation, stimulating
loud statements of state leaders who make such statements being
unable to change anything in reality. Here are the new trends in the
global politics.
How can the oligarchic system be broken in Armenia?
The destruction of the oligarchic system is possible only through
disassociation of the people's movement from the political parties,
which is very much important. Today the oligarchic system of Armenia
is in a deep crisis and cannot function. The oligarchic system works
if there is a strict arrangement on separation of the spheres of
influence, as it was, for instance, during Robert Kocharyan's tenure.
At present, the oligarchy cannot even make such an arrangement. For
this reason, the oligarchs which are in the power always want to
strengthen the repression machinery. So, we strictly see the tendency
of turning Armenia into the police state, as the oligarchic system
cannot pay way any more", - he said. There is also another process -
socialization of the policy, like in case of the Prosperous Armenia
Party when one of the oligarchs is trying to attract the society to
his protection so that to contain the appetites of other oligarchs.
To come out from this vicious circle Sarkisyan has offered to study
the experience of other countries, in particular, Poland, Chile,
Ireland and United Arab Emirates. Only civil society is able to
implement the system changes, especially in the context of the fact
that the leadership of the parties became the main reason of the
situation when in 2008 the Armenian society could not overcome the
March crisis of the power.
Nobody captured buildings in any country where the democratic
revolution was successful. What is the difference between Armenia and
them? Everywhere the society and the elite of revolutionists, which
came forward in a natural way, delivered an ultimatum to the political
system. The ultimatum on the basis of the points of the written
Constitution. By means of terrible losses they forced their regimes
and administrations to admit their key demand - to hold free elections
and to invite all the parties to participate in these elections. The
idea of delivering an ultimatum is the core of all these revolutions.
Will you point at a certain criterion for fulfillment of such a
scenario in Armenia?
It is time to revise the forms of political activity, which are
obviously not successful in Armenia. For twenty years any revolt of
the people in Armenia has been managed by political forces, and there
has never arisen the question whether this is right or whether there is
an alternative. Since we constantly set the task to change the power,
convincing ourselves that system changes in Armenia are possible in
that case only, we should see the results or at least try to think
why nothing comes of it. Moreover, the whole XX century was a period
of examples of such experience, and one should also cast a glance at
our movement of 1988-1991.
The parties are unable to implement changes with the help of the
people, and the changes in the elite have failed to introduce any
essential changes in public life. In the meantime, no serious
surveys were conducted, and the public was not even told what
the political forces mean by system changes. Only change of power
was implied, nothing else. In this context, one should understand
what system we have and what system the society wants to create,
"especially in Armenia, where they very often speak of "restoration
of the constitutional regime", i.e. of something which has never
existed in Armenia. Now the society of Armenia is seriously thinking
how to build a constitutional and legal state - one of the most
developed state formations in the world. Any system change is a
revolution, no matter how the public dislikes this word and thinks
that revolution means seizure of buildings. Meanwhile, nobody seized
buildings in the countries, which made a democratic revolution. It
is done in a different way, by means of an ultimatum on the basis of
the written provisions of the Constitution. It was by means of big
losses and hardships that the people of these countries forced their
administrations to hold free elections. The force saying that a velvet
revolution should occur in Armenia should demonstrate the road map of
the revolution The public should know how the revolution will be made.
"And when such a road map appears, the specified force should say that
it will be dissolved after the revolution and will not participate
in the elections. The public should know this now to trust these
politicians.
From: A. Papazian
by David Stepanyan
arminfo
Wednesday, January 18, 14:10
Interview of Director of Armenian Centre for National and International
studies Manvel Sargsyan with ArmInfo news agency
Can you predict what international events may affect the situation
in Armenia, stemming from the foreign policy situation in the world
in 2011?
The recent developments in Russia have set quite new tasks to
partner-country Armenia. The ruling party in Russia Yedinaya Rossia
swept the parliamentary elections on December 4 causing wide public
discontent. Our leadership has officially congratulated Putin's
party, but no one knows what will happen in Russia tomorrow. It
makes impossible setting long-term goals in the foreign policy of
the country.
The developments and rapid processes in the Middle East and North
Africa that have changed the international situation and positions
of the lead superpowers in the world. These changes are felt also in
Armenia. The attitude of Russia, USA and Europe is very important for
us. But when the global political situation changes, the attitude of
these superpowers towards Armenia changes as well. Armenia can become
absolutely uninteresting to some countries or quite the opposite.
Therefore, it is very hard to predict anything in such uncertain
situation. In Armenia they have announced a policy of rapprochement
with Europe, on the one hand, and there are more and more opinions
that this rapprochement is just idle talks. The contents of NATO IPAP,
EU's Eastern Partnership and other projects are still uncertain. No
one speaks of reality, because the reality is becoming less and less
clear to the disintegrating Europe, much less it is clear to Armenia.
Instability in Syria, the situation around Iran, the threats of Turkey
and Israel, where is this stemming from and what may it result in?
Obviously, 50 years of relative political stability affected all the
countries in the world, and quite sustainable political institutes of
power, for instance, in Arab countries, have turned into rudiments that
began to ruin. This happened as relevant ties, agreements, arrangements
that no longer exist, backed them. So, they proved powerless against
the rapidly changing situation. Thousands of unarmed people in the
Arab countries take to the streets and die for they can no longer
live as they lived before. The external interference is based on
the law of the international relations. When something happens,
every country speaks of its position, and it is normal. For instance,
in the case of Syria, Russia strives to preserve what it has, while
Turkey is trying to gain something.
What regional events may be expected at least in the mid-term prospect,
taking into consideration the growing tension?
I still see growing of instability in the region. It is hard to
predict what it will lead to in the conditions of the modern world. It
is especially relevant taking into consideration the amorphism of
relations between the countries.
Such amorphism in the relations of countries leads to inevitable
atomization. War unleashed by one country can be managed by another.
This amorphism is the key factor restraining the situation, stimulating
loud statements of state leaders who make such statements being
unable to change anything in reality. Here are the new trends in the
global politics.
How can the oligarchic system be broken in Armenia?
The destruction of the oligarchic system is possible only through
disassociation of the people's movement from the political parties,
which is very much important. Today the oligarchic system of Armenia
is in a deep crisis and cannot function. The oligarchic system works
if there is a strict arrangement on separation of the spheres of
influence, as it was, for instance, during Robert Kocharyan's tenure.
At present, the oligarchy cannot even make such an arrangement. For
this reason, the oligarchs which are in the power always want to
strengthen the repression machinery. So, we strictly see the tendency
of turning Armenia into the police state, as the oligarchic system
cannot pay way any more", - he said. There is also another process -
socialization of the policy, like in case of the Prosperous Armenia
Party when one of the oligarchs is trying to attract the society to
his protection so that to contain the appetites of other oligarchs.
To come out from this vicious circle Sarkisyan has offered to study
the experience of other countries, in particular, Poland, Chile,
Ireland and United Arab Emirates. Only civil society is able to
implement the system changes, especially in the context of the fact
that the leadership of the parties became the main reason of the
situation when in 2008 the Armenian society could not overcome the
March crisis of the power.
Nobody captured buildings in any country where the democratic
revolution was successful. What is the difference between Armenia and
them? Everywhere the society and the elite of revolutionists, which
came forward in a natural way, delivered an ultimatum to the political
system. The ultimatum on the basis of the points of the written
Constitution. By means of terrible losses they forced their regimes
and administrations to admit their key demand - to hold free elections
and to invite all the parties to participate in these elections. The
idea of delivering an ultimatum is the core of all these revolutions.
Will you point at a certain criterion for fulfillment of such a
scenario in Armenia?
It is time to revise the forms of political activity, which are
obviously not successful in Armenia. For twenty years any revolt of
the people in Armenia has been managed by political forces, and there
has never arisen the question whether this is right or whether there is
an alternative. Since we constantly set the task to change the power,
convincing ourselves that system changes in Armenia are possible in
that case only, we should see the results or at least try to think
why nothing comes of it. Moreover, the whole XX century was a period
of examples of such experience, and one should also cast a glance at
our movement of 1988-1991.
The parties are unable to implement changes with the help of the
people, and the changes in the elite have failed to introduce any
essential changes in public life. In the meantime, no serious
surveys were conducted, and the public was not even told what
the political forces mean by system changes. Only change of power
was implied, nothing else. In this context, one should understand
what system we have and what system the society wants to create,
"especially in Armenia, where they very often speak of "restoration
of the constitutional regime", i.e. of something which has never
existed in Armenia. Now the society of Armenia is seriously thinking
how to build a constitutional and legal state - one of the most
developed state formations in the world. Any system change is a
revolution, no matter how the public dislikes this word and thinks
that revolution means seizure of buildings. Meanwhile, nobody seized
buildings in the countries, which made a democratic revolution. It
is done in a different way, by means of an ultimatum on the basis of
the written provisions of the Constitution. It was by means of big
losses and hardships that the people of these countries forced their
administrations to hold free elections. The force saying that a velvet
revolution should occur in Armenia should demonstrate the road map of
the revolution The public should know how the revolution will be made.
"And when such a road map appears, the specified force should say that
it will be dissolved after the revolution and will not participate
in the elections. The public should know this now to trust these
politicians.
From: A. Papazian