Tweet
POST-ELECTORAL ARMENIA: PROBLEM IS DEFINED CLEARLY
Siranuysh Papyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/interview/view/29100
21:34 26/02/2013
Interview with Manvel Sargsyan, ACNIS director
Mr. Sargsyan, we seem to have underestimated people so far thought
they were weak and disappointed. Has the society proved that we
were mistaken?
Whenever a political force fails, it immediately blames the society -
it is bad, it is venal. In the parliamentary election the government
put the society in a marginal state, playing a game with the political
balloon, the PAP, spoilt the solutions and involved everyone in
this process.
Meanwhile, people are encouraged whenever they see hope and
constructive proposals. So was in 2008 and so is now. People gave
their votes, afterwards the regime concocted the result it needed,
established elections as a mechanism of its reproduction, which was
followed by post-electoral processes till the next election.
This time the regime was shocked because a lot of political parties
understood the election would not change anything and did not run
in the election and stated that everything is finished, dead. They
have projected their own perceptions on the country and state if
they sink, the whole country will sink. This is the main issue of
the clan approach.
Mr. Sargsyan, why did Serzh Sargsyan decline Raffi Hovannisian's
proposals? Earlier he was believed to differ from Robert Kocharyan.
Perceptions that Serzh Sargsyan differs from Robert Kocharyan are
invented and have nothing to do with the reality. It is the same
criminal-oligarchic system, and if persons change, the essence does
not change. They will never allow the mechanism of free elections
and justice to work because the criminal-oligarchic system is based
on decay of these two pillars. This work is being done. This work is
done by the RPA, the party of oligarchs which dominates the state.
Accordingly, the key political issue has been formulated in this
country. The parties with anti-constitutional activities do not have
the right to run in the election. The problem has been formulated but
I still do not know how this problem must be solved. The question
arises whether it is possible to establish an electoral mechanism
in Armenia. So far nobody has put forth the concept that first there
must be a guarantee of free elections to be followed by a legitimate
government. But the key issue is if the Armenian society will be able
to ensure free elections.
Mr. Sargsyan, Andrias Ghukasyan put forth these ideas but they did not
become a subject of discussion, were not understood profoundly. Why?
It's very important why. People are unable to read and understand five
lines on a page that free election is possible if the illegal party
does not participate in the election. When it participates, and its
participation is recognized as its right, there is no election. This
is simple but the Armenian society of clans is unable to understand
this. When the problem is formulated, it is understood with difficulty
by the society, our society is the victim of non-formulated problems.
Let's refer to the example of other countries to explain what to
formulate an issue means. In the last year of Perestroika in the
country where people lived under the yoke of the Communist Party for
70 years Boris Yeltsin formulated the problem. He said the one trouble
in the country is the ruling Communist Party which has usurped the
state, and the country will not be a country unless it rids of that
party. He said so, he led the country forward.
Now, when we put forth an objective, we must state it clearly what
we are speaking about, what the aim of people is. It is hard to
formulate the objective but it is even more difficult to perceive the
formulated problem. But I know there are political and public figures
who have realized the problem of the country - having a free electoral
mechanism which is ensured by way of depriving the party which has
usurped government of the right to participate in the election. If
this question is understood, the country will move forward, if not,
a futile cycle of five years will start. This time there will be
another purpose of mobilization.
Now will there be a clear action plan, not short term ones?
People were brought to the rally, later they were sent home without a
clear task, weren't they? Moreover, it is not right to divide the task
between leaders and people. This is a weak practice. People must be
involved in solving the formulated task. We have had such an approach
in our modern history. For example, a problem was formulated in 1988.
The Regional Soviet of Nagorno-Karabakh applied to the RA Supreme
Soviet for unification of Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia. The Supreme
Soviet of Armenia had to answer, Armenia was under the Communist
yoke, the deputies of nomenclature did not utter a sound. Half a
year passed, people gathered on Freedom Square, set forth the issue,
worked out the task and drafted an action plan how to have the deputies
accept it. People were divided to groups, designated team leaders,
made hundreds of deputies one by one to adopt a decision. Now the
problem has been formulated, it is necessary to find the technology
which will deprive the RPA of the right to run in the election and
dissolve. If we succeed, we will change the situation, if not, the
same situation will continue in the country.
Maybe it is very difficult to defeat the criminal-oligarchic system.
The criminal-oligarchic system is the consequence of this state
of things. If the society is unable to define clearly the public
interest, define the problem, the criminals permanently usurped the
public administration until the society stands up and drives them
away. However, the problems are more and more clearly defined.
Is a different result possible if a lot of forces join the movement?
First it is necessary to introduce the goal and the action plan. It
is obvious at the moment that a big part of the society is ready
to achieve any objective. Most probably, they are ready to do it
themselves, not relying on leaders. Entire towns have escaped the claws
of the regime. Young people are mobilized. There is a possibility
to self-organize over a common goal - oust the politicized criminal
united under the RPA flag from the public administration.
Today there are proposals to form interim committees in different
areas, organizations and companies. I think this is a good idea.
Students can form the first of such strike committees and oust the
RPA clans from universities, starting with the nomenclature student
boards. Furthermore, the City Hall, the parliament, the president
administration. An important job will be found for the Armenian
political parties - not to hinder people's "cleaning" job.
Siranuysh Papyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/interview/view/29100
21:34 26/02/2013
Interview with Manvel Sargsyan, ACNIS director
Mr. Sargsyan, we seem to have underestimated people so far thought
they were weak and disappointed. Has the society proved that we
were mistaken?
Whenever a political force fails, it immediately blames the society -
it is bad, it is venal. In the parliamentary election the government
put the society in a marginal state, playing a game with the political
balloon, the PAP, spoilt the solutions and involved everyone in
this process.
Meanwhile, people are encouraged whenever they see hope and
constructive proposals. So was in 2008 and so is now. People gave
their votes, afterwards the regime concocted the result it needed,
established elections as a mechanism of its reproduction, which was
followed by post-electoral processes till the next election.
This time the regime was shocked because a lot of political parties
understood the election would not change anything and did not run
in the election and stated that everything is finished, dead. They
have projected their own perceptions on the country and state if
they sink, the whole country will sink. This is the main issue of
the clan approach.
Mr. Sargsyan, why did Serzh Sargsyan decline Raffi Hovannisian's
proposals? Earlier he was believed to differ from Robert Kocharyan.
Perceptions that Serzh Sargsyan differs from Robert Kocharyan are
invented and have nothing to do with the reality. It is the same
criminal-oligarchic system, and if persons change, the essence does
not change. They will never allow the mechanism of free elections
and justice to work because the criminal-oligarchic system is based
on decay of these two pillars. This work is being done. This work is
done by the RPA, the party of oligarchs which dominates the state.
Accordingly, the key political issue has been formulated in this
country. The parties with anti-constitutional activities do not have
the right to run in the election. The problem has been formulated but
I still do not know how this problem must be solved. The question
arises whether it is possible to establish an electoral mechanism
in Armenia. So far nobody has put forth the concept that first there
must be a guarantee of free elections to be followed by a legitimate
government. But the key issue is if the Armenian society will be able
to ensure free elections.
Mr. Sargsyan, Andrias Ghukasyan put forth these ideas but they did not
become a subject of discussion, were not understood profoundly. Why?
It's very important why. People are unable to read and understand five
lines on a page that free election is possible if the illegal party
does not participate in the election. When it participates, and its
participation is recognized as its right, there is no election. This
is simple but the Armenian society of clans is unable to understand
this. When the problem is formulated, it is understood with difficulty
by the society, our society is the victim of non-formulated problems.
Let's refer to the example of other countries to explain what to
formulate an issue means. In the last year of Perestroika in the
country where people lived under the yoke of the Communist Party for
70 years Boris Yeltsin formulated the problem. He said the one trouble
in the country is the ruling Communist Party which has usurped the
state, and the country will not be a country unless it rids of that
party. He said so, he led the country forward.
Now, when we put forth an objective, we must state it clearly what
we are speaking about, what the aim of people is. It is hard to
formulate the objective but it is even more difficult to perceive the
formulated problem. But I know there are political and public figures
who have realized the problem of the country - having a free electoral
mechanism which is ensured by way of depriving the party which has
usurped government of the right to participate in the election. If
this question is understood, the country will move forward, if not,
a futile cycle of five years will start. This time there will be
another purpose of mobilization.
Now will there be a clear action plan, not short term ones?
People were brought to the rally, later they were sent home without a
clear task, weren't they? Moreover, it is not right to divide the task
between leaders and people. This is a weak practice. People must be
involved in solving the formulated task. We have had such an approach
in our modern history. For example, a problem was formulated in 1988.
The Regional Soviet of Nagorno-Karabakh applied to the RA Supreme
Soviet for unification of Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia. The Supreme
Soviet of Armenia had to answer, Armenia was under the Communist
yoke, the deputies of nomenclature did not utter a sound. Half a
year passed, people gathered on Freedom Square, set forth the issue,
worked out the task and drafted an action plan how to have the deputies
accept it. People were divided to groups, designated team leaders,
made hundreds of deputies one by one to adopt a decision. Now the
problem has been formulated, it is necessary to find the technology
which will deprive the RPA of the right to run in the election and
dissolve. If we succeed, we will change the situation, if not, the
same situation will continue in the country.
Maybe it is very difficult to defeat the criminal-oligarchic system.
The criminal-oligarchic system is the consequence of this state
of things. If the society is unable to define clearly the public
interest, define the problem, the criminals permanently usurped the
public administration until the society stands up and drives them
away. However, the problems are more and more clearly defined.
Is a different result possible if a lot of forces join the movement?
First it is necessary to introduce the goal and the action plan. It
is obvious at the moment that a big part of the society is ready
to achieve any objective. Most probably, they are ready to do it
themselves, not relying on leaders. Entire towns have escaped the claws
of the regime. Young people are mobilized. There is a possibility
to self-organize over a common goal - oust the politicized criminal
united under the RPA flag from the public administration.
Today there are proposals to form interim committees in different
areas, organizations and companies. I think this is a good idea.
Students can form the first of such strike committees and oust the
RPA clans from universities, starting with the nomenclature student
boards. Furthermore, the City Hall, the parliament, the president
administration. An important job will be found for the Armenian
political parties - not to hinder people's "cleaning" job.