Tweet
CIVIL LAVA WILL SWEEP THEM AWAY
Siranuysh Papyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/interview26834.html
Published: 17:57:09 - 12/07/2012
Interview with historian Saro Saroyan, ACNIS expert
Saro, in the past few weeks developments on the civil plane were very
dynamic. In your opinion, should the target be one oligarch or one
criminal or is it time to hold responsible the other criminals and
oligarchs as well?
Of course, it is desirable to handle the issue of responsibility
of the criminal-oligarchic pyramid as soon as possible. However,
wish and ability should not be identified. The civil riot is as much
as the civil resource. Armenia faces unlawfulness every day and the
society cannot react adequately to all the cases. Everything is left
up to the regular course of developments. And if the society is still
able to come together to resolve the issue of one oligarch, it means
it has just enough potential for that one. In other cases, we would
have another picture which would be reflected in national issues. For
instance, had the society had more abilities for self-organization,
Armenians would not have 42,000 square km but several times more. But
I am more interested in the dynamics of public consolidation and
uprising. The regime has already received several yellow cards and has
reason to fear. If we review the past year, we will see that the local
victories of the civil movement are not one or two but already several,
while the number of civil activists has multiplied. I certainly mean
those citizens who set goals and try to achieve them rather than wait
until a wise man will say a wise thing standing at the rostrum and
will then ask them to go home, and they are happy with these words
and live waiting for the next rally.
Saro, it turns out that their number multiplies but this number does
not seem to be enough to ensure serious changes.
To answer your question I first need to brief on the internal affairs.
There is a regime which has split before the elections to form a
coalition government but in fact to get larger pieces of the cake. The
opposition is split, there are some parties which have expectations
from the regime but also they lack a mechanism, methodology, tactics
and strategy for struggle. Consequently, they are opposition for
themselves but never for the implementation of the public demand.
Besides these two groups of subjects there are increasing layers of the
civil society who can shape an agenda that can make the regime leave
the so-called political field and get down to the work of containing
the growing force of the civil society. It is also visible that the
opposition parties see that they are not needed in this context and
they want to make an agenda to enter this sphere and take a position
there.
Now I come to the answer to your question. The civil society is in a
stage of forming a sufficient number, and soon it may achieve serious
change in the country if the parties as individuals forget about their
political views and get down to work for systemic change, while the
party leaders will not disturb them and not try to earn interest from
this process. Otherwise, the latter will return the civil movement
to the same point of defeats of opposition parties, and emigration.
Saro, what results can be achieved through strong self-organization?
What will be the best result of a real election without vote buying?
I have stated in one of my previous interviews that the civil struggle
is not struggle for power but a way to achieve systemic change and
establish a constitutional state. The presidential elections are
the culmination of this struggle so they have a different meaning to
the civil society. I think with unity of political forces targeting
free and fair elections ahead of the next election to the rigged,
it will be possible to achieve serious participation of civil sets
in the elections. However, the lack of confidence in parties is
so devastating that there may not be a full unification. Hence the
presidential elections do not have a big importance from the point of
view of the civil struggle if the only target is to win the election.
Does it mean that the issue of revolution and change of government
must be withdrawn from the agenda and change must be achieved through
raising specific issues and having them resolved?
The civil movement will naturally lead to change of regime and systemic
change. The person de jure heading the regime will have to sacrifice
the oligarchs supporting the regime one by one in order to prolong
its life or it will defend them with teeth and the lava of the civil
movement will rise and spill. I think Serzh Sargsyan has chosen the
third option. Following the methodology of this system, he tries to
let down the oligarchs and the civil society alternately. In fact,
he hopes that by playing between them he will hold on to power as long
as he needs. But this mechanism is very unreliable because as soon as
the deception is revealed, each side will come back to him with more
claims. Hence, the pillars of the regime will replace their leader
or the civil uprising will sweep away the government lost in lies.
Saro, this mechanism has proved quite reliably for several years,
while civil activists hardly count several hundreds. How can they
sweep away everything?
The regime may think that there are no premises for a social and
political explosion but for me the main criterion of assessment is the
dynamics of social unity and uprising. This is going up. People who
considered political pressure in accordance with the Constitution
as the only way of struggle are already speaking about radical
revolutionary steps. The other circumstance is that after the
developments of Mashtots Park new horizons will open up where will
leads to victory. This mechanism has proved viable and is becoming
a key instrument of fight for the layers of the society. The regime
fears this and tries to prevent this. But it will not succeed if
there is sufficient civil will. The civil lava will eventually sweep
the regime away.
Siranuysh Papyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/interview26834.html
Published: 17:57:09 - 12/07/2012
Interview with historian Saro Saroyan, ACNIS expert
Saro, in the past few weeks developments on the civil plane were very
dynamic. In your opinion, should the target be one oligarch or one
criminal or is it time to hold responsible the other criminals and
oligarchs as well?
Of course, it is desirable to handle the issue of responsibility
of the criminal-oligarchic pyramid as soon as possible. However,
wish and ability should not be identified. The civil riot is as much
as the civil resource. Armenia faces unlawfulness every day and the
society cannot react adequately to all the cases. Everything is left
up to the regular course of developments. And if the society is still
able to come together to resolve the issue of one oligarch, it means
it has just enough potential for that one. In other cases, we would
have another picture which would be reflected in national issues. For
instance, had the society had more abilities for self-organization,
Armenians would not have 42,000 square km but several times more. But
I am more interested in the dynamics of public consolidation and
uprising. The regime has already received several yellow cards and has
reason to fear. If we review the past year, we will see that the local
victories of the civil movement are not one or two but already several,
while the number of civil activists has multiplied. I certainly mean
those citizens who set goals and try to achieve them rather than wait
until a wise man will say a wise thing standing at the rostrum and
will then ask them to go home, and they are happy with these words
and live waiting for the next rally.
Saro, it turns out that their number multiplies but this number does
not seem to be enough to ensure serious changes.
To answer your question I first need to brief on the internal affairs.
There is a regime which has split before the elections to form a
coalition government but in fact to get larger pieces of the cake. The
opposition is split, there are some parties which have expectations
from the regime but also they lack a mechanism, methodology, tactics
and strategy for struggle. Consequently, they are opposition for
themselves but never for the implementation of the public demand.
Besides these two groups of subjects there are increasing layers of the
civil society who can shape an agenda that can make the regime leave
the so-called political field and get down to the work of containing
the growing force of the civil society. It is also visible that the
opposition parties see that they are not needed in this context and
they want to make an agenda to enter this sphere and take a position
there.
Now I come to the answer to your question. The civil society is in a
stage of forming a sufficient number, and soon it may achieve serious
change in the country if the parties as individuals forget about their
political views and get down to work for systemic change, while the
party leaders will not disturb them and not try to earn interest from
this process. Otherwise, the latter will return the civil movement
to the same point of defeats of opposition parties, and emigration.
Saro, what results can be achieved through strong self-organization?
What will be the best result of a real election without vote buying?
I have stated in one of my previous interviews that the civil struggle
is not struggle for power but a way to achieve systemic change and
establish a constitutional state. The presidential elections are
the culmination of this struggle so they have a different meaning to
the civil society. I think with unity of political forces targeting
free and fair elections ahead of the next election to the rigged,
it will be possible to achieve serious participation of civil sets
in the elections. However, the lack of confidence in parties is
so devastating that there may not be a full unification. Hence the
presidential elections do not have a big importance from the point of
view of the civil struggle if the only target is to win the election.
Does it mean that the issue of revolution and change of government
must be withdrawn from the agenda and change must be achieved through
raising specific issues and having them resolved?
The civil movement will naturally lead to change of regime and systemic
change. The person de jure heading the regime will have to sacrifice
the oligarchs supporting the regime one by one in order to prolong
its life or it will defend them with teeth and the lava of the civil
movement will rise and spill. I think Serzh Sargsyan has chosen the
third option. Following the methodology of this system, he tries to
let down the oligarchs and the civil society alternately. In fact,
he hopes that by playing between them he will hold on to power as long
as he needs. But this mechanism is very unreliable because as soon as
the deception is revealed, each side will come back to him with more
claims. Hence, the pillars of the regime will replace their leader
or the civil uprising will sweep away the government lost in lies.
Saro, this mechanism has proved quite reliably for several years,
while civil activists hardly count several hundreds. How can they
sweep away everything?
The regime may think that there are no premises for a social and
political explosion but for me the main criterion of assessment is the
dynamics of social unity and uprising. This is going up. People who
considered political pressure in accordance with the Constitution
as the only way of struggle are already speaking about radical
revolutionary steps. The other circumstance is that after the
developments of Mashtots Park new horizons will open up where will
leads to victory. This mechanism has proved viable and is becoming
a key instrument of fight for the layers of the society. The regime
fears this and tries to prevent this. But it will not succeed if
there is sufficient civil will. The civil lava will eventually sweep
the regime away.