Presidential adviser expects no “apricot revolution” in Armenia

Ayots Ashkar, Yerevan
2 Dec 04

There will be no “apricot revolution” in Armenia, as there is no real
alternative to the incumbent authorities, the president’s security
adviser has said. Garnik Isagulyan said that the former ruling party,
the Armenian Pan-National Movement, was the real opposition and was
gradually trying to move out of the shadows. “The tragedy of the APNM
is that it does not have a leader accepted by the people,” Isagulyan
said, adding that society did not support the APNM’s Levon
Ter-Petrosyan, Armenia’s former president. The following is the text
of Vahan Vardanyan’s interview with Isagulyan published in Armenian
newspaper Ayots Ashkar on 2 December and headlined “There will be no
revolution”; subheadings inserted editorially:

An interview with the Armenian president’s adviser on security issues,
Garnik Isagulyan.

[Ayots Ashkar correspondent] The opposition thinks that the Karabakh
issue will soon become a centre of confrontation. Do you agree with
this view?

[Garnik Isagulyan] Armenia is multipolar and multilayered in its
foreign policy. We do not have the objective of being an appendage of
one superpower against another and it is senseless to search for
external signals of a power change. As for the Karabakh issue, the
policy of today’s authorities cannot be seen as anything but positive
by any Armenian who worries about the national interests.

Victory of “orange revolution” would divide Ukraine

[Correspondent] Mr Isagulyan, against the background of the events
taking place in Ukraine views are expressed in Armenia that Yerevan
will be the next refuge of the “orange revolution”. How possible is
this?

[Isagulyan] Indeed, it seems to become a tradition immediately to
compare the processes of any post-Soviet country with Armenia. That
happened in the case of the Georgian “rose revolution”, now it is
happening with Ukraine. The Ukrainian events showed that the fight is
not in the name of democracy, but between the superpowers and, because
of these actions, the country is divided into two parts. Incidentally,
the majority of the country’s industry, the entire coastline with
ports, that is 80 per cent of the economy, is centred in the
southeastern regions that have a pro-Russian orientation and where
millions of Russians live. For this reason the victory of the “orange
revolution” in Ukraine will at best lead to the gradual separation of
the country and at worst to civil war, which we should not be happy
about or use as a model.

Armenian authorities and people not at loggerheads

[Correspondent] Nevertheless against this background the opposition
has stepped up its activity to a certain degree in Armenia.

[Isagulyan] We saw them step up their activity more seriously in the
2003 elections as well as in the first part of this year. We also know
the slogans on which the opposition tried to base the need for a power
change and they failed. This does not mean that there are no problems
in the country, the authorities are trying to resolve them
gradually. Simply in its turn the opposition did not put forward an
alternative programme. On the other hand, Armenia is a monoethnic
country. Unlike Ukraine and Georgia, power at the top and the state
structures are strong enough. And finally, there is no urgent problem
over which the authorities and the public are taking opposing
positions.

Ter-Petrosyan not accepted by public

[Correspondent] The fact that [ex-President] Levon Ter-Petrosyan broke
his long silence is viewed as an external, western signal. By the way,
he mentioned in his interview that the stage-by-stage option for a
Karabakh settlement, put forward in 1997, was the best and that in
future we will not gain anything more.

[Isagulyan] It would be surprising if the former president said
anything different, because that would mean abandoning his positions
expressed in the well-known “War or Peace” article. As for the option
of 1997, it foresaw the unconditional capitulation of the liberated
territories to Azerbaijan without specification of Karabakh’s
status. It was clear from different statements of the president that
they expected to leave Karabakh within Azerbaijan. Let nobody dispute
that we can reach this worst scenario at any moment and without Levon
Ter-Petrosyan. Today if we suggest the same to Azerbaijan, they will
agree with pleasure. Who will not agree without any effort to get what
he lost forever? I see no trend in the former president’s
interview. His meetings with the political elite of different
countries do not at all mean that the West foresees any action to
return him to politics.

[Correspondent] In that case how do you explain the trend of the
opposition stepping up its activity? Maybe with the help of new
slogans, new ideas and a new composition they hope that the people
will follow them.

[Isagulyan] I have mentioned many times that in Armenia the Armenian
Pan-National Movement [APNM] is the real opposition, it rules all the
other developments from the shadows. Today the APNM is trying to leave
the shadows gradually, as it sees no other force that can take the
flag of the opposition. Simply the tragedy of the APNM is that it does
not have a leader accepted by the people. On the whole it has nobody
except Ter-Petrosyan. Our society’s attitude towards Ter-Petrosyan is
known. Nobody has forgotten the cold and dark years.

No “apricot revolution” in Armenia

One of the leaders of the opposition said once that, as the apricot is
the most Armenian fruit, our revolution will be the “apricot
revolution”. I think that there is no ground for an “apricot
revolution”, as there is no real alternative to the present
authorities that has a programme, the people’s trust and has not been
already compromised.