WHY ARE THE PEOPLE OF KARABAKH RELUCTANT TO SOLVE THE DESTINY OF
THEIR OWN COUNTRY?

lragir.am
21-06-2007

IGOR MURADYAN

In a lot of publications the authors try to interpret the outcome
of the Armenian parliamentary election. Most of them who have been
hoping for so many years despite the abundant material for the "free
expression of will" of people, are asking questions after the past
election which the wise men of the ancient world would not ask – "may
people sell themselves out?" or "is it fair to accuse people?" Answering
these questions would be as idiotic a business as to hope for an
adequate behavior of the population which is usually referred to as
public. At the same time, I maintain that in any country of Eastern
Europe, which has stepped into a period of "formal democracy" like
Armenia, a similar behavior of voters is observed as in Armenia. In
these countries which hardly differ from the Armenian people by social
parameters there is a layer of population which sell themselves out, as
they put it. But these layers count very few, they are underprivileged
people who are involved in the capacity of an "optional electoral
program". In Armenia, hundreds of thousands, to be more honest, millions
sell themselves out. This type of democracy is a convenient facility for
the infinitely commercialized elite. Even the Western community, getting
convinced that there can be no other results in Armenia, saves its
previous financial, humanitarian and political investments in Armenia,
and decided to give up and build up its geopolitical objectives together
with this elite. In other words, ours cornered the West. The judgments
that Armenians used to be different are bullshit. The Armenians are what
they always were and what they are everywhere, in all social formations
and under any regime. Another question that arises is whether it could
have been different. The question arouses doubt but leaves space for
hope. Armenians transform very quickly, it takes them a wink to
transform public priorities and interests if a clear, justified,
conscious and meaningful but absolutely irrational idea is set before
them. The current type of Armenian politicians is unable to offer such
an idea. It is necessary to put up a politician whose psychological and
physical character would be that of a pragmatic idealist. The current
modern politicians able to achieve success in most earthly problems are
definitely of this type. It is a prescription for politicians of both
great powers and minor states. The given judgments, even though they
seem deviated, are essential to a realistic perception of the means of
solution of definite problems. In addition, realistic expectations are
highly doubtful; the Armenian nation will hardly be able to solve the
problem of the political elite, the political leader and the choice of
priorities, but it is worthwhile to make a try. At any rate, some
problems were solved, but there was a complete dissipation of national
forces, separate groups of people were highly active and their activity
is fruitful. The political and administrative resource was not
sufficient to complete the first stage of state building. The country’s
leaders displayed personal intellectual and moral problems, became
engaged in economic activity, which after an obvious and interesting
dynamics led to economic stagnation and a social deadlock.

A clear political crime – the society which had the minimal
ability to political motivations and behavior was intentionally led into
political dystrophy. There is only one universal means to change this
miserable state – to offer an idea to people. The political parties and
leaders consciously took the track for eliminating ideology from the
political sphere for they bewared and did not need an ideology, relying
on the priority of the "daily bread". The daily bread is also happiness
when it lacks, but when it becomes morality, justification, argument and
a "historical goal", the ideologists of the lack of ideology end up in
the rubbish bin. The society has been made to face to a "choice without
an alternative", by its own bourgeois or others. What ideology can there
be? The liberal ideology has already become a historical damnation for
the peoples which are used as raw materials in the triune scheme of
globalization leaders-partners-raw material. The non-ordinary ideas
overwhelming the Armenian society became funny and any mentioning or
discussion of them becomes a sign of almost marginality and
unimportance.

The political elite has shaken off the ideology of political
nationalism – the only opportunity for the Armenians, no matter where
they live. This nation, which has been waiting for so many years in
every election, like a prostitute, political nationalism and a
nationalist president. Not only the determined people will follow a
nationalist president but also those people who are far from the public
pathos. Robert Kocharyan had everything to fulfill this goal but he
focused too much on momentary issues, classifying politics among
"ideas". Robert Kocharyan could use the remaining time of presidential
office not for solving private problems but for making for the gaps in
politics. Now nobody expects any solutions in economy and the social
sphere from him, he could do something about foreign policies, which is
usually referred to as "foiling" the plans of opponents and partners,
which would help establish new principles in considering the Karabakh
issue and other priorities. The current situation, and the current elite
aspiring to absolute power will not let him do it, and the failure of
the Bargavach Hayastan project is evidence to this. The so-called ruling
Republican Party is a conglomerate of several groups which view a number
of foreign political issues differently. Even the Americans preferred in
this absurd situation remembering the dissident origin of this party. At
any rate, without a critical dose of political nationalism and a
principled leader this organization will dissolve. Too much burden has
been assumed to be able to stay at least visually within the frame of a
desirable image. Now the party is exposed to a major threat, and most
members are unlikely to assume too much. For instance, the Republican
Party is responsible why in the period of the parliamentary election
there was no discussion on the Karabakh issue. If there is a wish, this
topic may easily become a topic for discussion in the visible
perspective. The return of a square meter of territory of the Lowlands
of Karabakh will become the beginning of the agony of the Republican
Party, despite skeptics who think that someone will avoid
responsibility. A dictatorship has emerged in Armenia, and this
dictatorship is acknowledged as legitimate by the society and the
external partners, but the dictatorship is not hanging in the air and is
also exposed to internal and external threats and may not meet external
challenges.

Getting finally lost in this absurdity and defeatism, 117 thousand
Armenians voted for the ARF Dashnaktsutyun in the past election, making
the last desperate move, which gave a surprise to the confused and
demoralized leadership of this party. Not only the Republican Party’s
and Bargavach Hayastan’s functionaries but also a Republican member of
parliament voted for the ARF Dashnaktsutyun. What a fun! For
Dashnaktsutyun, obeying and going on in the cartridge of the government
is the same as death. The leaders of the party, despite being high, are
able to evaluate the result of the election objectively, perceive the
real situation and the state their party is in, which has been in a
state of collapse and crisis for a long time. One more step towards
conformism, and subordination will turn the party into a service
personnel which count many in Armenia. Therefore, it would be
meaningless, for the Dashnaks offered services to the government of NKR
and would lead to divide of the party, which is already becoming
outlined. It is not accidental that the Dashnaks in different countries
do not accept cooperation of the party with governments in the
executive.

There are a number of peoples and countries in the world which
have resigned themselves to their historical and political fate, and
everywhere the political ideology, the idea is being reanimated. It may
be thanks to the improvement of nourishment all over the world, but it
is also possible that the political elite are interested in it. In
ruined Serbia and the well-off countries of Western Europe the social
ideology, that is the ideology of the "daily bread", has been
definitively discarded, and nationalistic, obviously rightist ideologies
are emerging with the synthesis of rightists and collectivist values,
otherwise they will not survive. The political parties of the West and
the East have no perspective without clear ideologization of political
programs. Despite skeptics, the ideological differences are becoming
deeper in the United States, and a polarization of political forces is
underway. In Europe a process of formation of new or modified
ideological values is underway. Turkey and Iran became the centers of
spreading new ideologies, therefore what we observed in our election in
Armenia is impossible in both the countries we had arrogantly considered
as backward.

In our parliamentary and presidential elections in Armenia only
one thing is discussed – the possible expenses and the amount of ballot
stuffing. Neither our allies nor our foes heard an objective discussion
of the relation of Armenia with the great powers, NATO and the EU, our
role and importance in the world. These are highly dangerous and uneasy
topics for the Armenian politicians, especially that none of the
Armenian politicians has any idea of the essence of these problems.

In this miserable state, desperate minor functionaries are
preparing for another Sabbath in Karabakh, who introduce themselves as
the only lords of this country. A replication, projection of the events
in Yerevan is being prepared. The social problems are a great topic. Who
stole and misappropriated and how much is a special topic the revelation
of which will take too much time and will hardly be effective. Although
the society in Karabakh is mostly interested in this topic, for the time
being I am interested in foreign policy and security.

The Karabakh movement began when the USSR existed, when there was
a different perception of the geopolitical perspective. At the same
time, the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region was never a state, and it
is unacceptable to judge or discuss any solutions on the basis of that
false political reality. The statements that the return of the Lowlands
of Karabakh as a stipulation in the so-called settlement will help
sustain peace and strengthen the eastern border of Armenia are bullshit,
and if the Armenian government believes this, here is actually a moment
of truth. The government is trying either to distract people from this
problem or to scare with war. Both are but ways of holding on to power.
NKR President Arkady Ghukasyan offered as an argument the fact that "no
political party in Armenia considers keeping these territories." One
more argument is offered: "The mediators would not listen to anything
about the region of Shahumyan and the other lost territories." First of
all, the political parties of Armenia had better mind their own business
and care for their own asses. Second, our government has never discussed
the problem of Shahumyan and the other territories with the mediators
during the talks. These are absolutely invented arguments and cannot be
taken seriously. The actual borders is not a caprice and ambitions but
essential conditions to the existence of the Armenians of Karabakh. As a
defense minister, secretary of the Council of Security and prime
minister, Serge Sargsyan has stated for a number of times the expediency
of returning the Lowlands of Karabakh, citing the argument that the
people of Karabakh wanted to unite with Armenia, not to occupy these
territories. Now only God knows what the people of Karabakh wanted at
that time. And thanks God the people of Karabakh have forgotten what
they wanted at that time. (Otherwise they would remember God knows
what.) As to those who had initiated the movement never imagined
Karabakh without its Northern part and unification with Armenia via the
well-known territories. Those who hoped for a party and Soviet career
now have difficulty to understand this. Generally, most people would
like to delete the past and start the present with their triumphs. Many
judge as if we all are already dead. It is not true, not everyone is
dead. There is considerable information on the essence of the talks,
even when it is impossible to find out all the nuances at once, it will
be possible later; in addition, some circumstances are found out which
never become known to the Armenian officious, including some behavioral
episodes of separate diplomats. Frankly speaking, there are not many
claims. It is not definitely true that the talks are not professional,
but professionalism is not enough. The problem of Karabakh defies only
the tricks of reaction to the challenges that come in. The Armenian
leadership publicly announces quite appropriate theses on the principles
of settlement, but often on the next day it starts discussing with the
foe and the mediators absolutely useless conditions, which has been the
case over the past years. President Kocharyan has not got reliable
information on the real values of the stakeholders for a lasting period,
for which the ministry of foreign affairs is to blame, which would not
lift the responsibility from the president.

Now the reader needs to be highly attentive. A friend of mine from
Baku says: "It’s not for mediocrities." "Our man" in Yerevan, who
aspires to be president of the Republic of Armenia, states the
territories of the Lowlands of Karabakh need to be returned to the enemy
"in return for peace". In NKR, another "our man" co-opts for presidency,
in the capacity of a friend and man of "our man’s" in Yerevan. Besides
them, there is another man who is in the capacity of an unrecognized
president in no one’s territory, much more unrecognized than
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic itself. This man is eager to remain in
"foreign policy" after leaving the post of president unrecognized in
Yerevan even, in other words, to remain where he has never been. Now in
an effort to present me as an irresponsible, destructive and maybe an
offended person who blackens noble Karabakh people, he forgets (or on
the contrary, remembers with pity) that over the past few years I have
been trying to make him interested in foreign policy. He talked to me
for 8 or 10 hours during every meeting, and my impression was that he is
ready to make every effort not to deal with foreign policies. And nobody
disturbs to think why the NKR president was barred from foreign
policies. I dare state that over the past 10 years no one from the
Armenian reality, our and your reality, has had such broad and various
foreign political contacts as I have had. I cannot state that as a
result of this exploration everything became clear but the budgets of
the programs I have participated were ten times more than the budget of
not only the NKR foreign ministry but also the receipts of the NKR
budget. At any rate, there was something to share with the Karabakh
leadership, possibly even to refill the budget of the NKR foreign
ministry. There were also opportunities to buy apartments for the
Karabakh officials in Yerevan. But those were not bought.

In the modern world the states lose their sovereignty quickly, and
even the major and powerful states have to reestablish their
sovereignty. However, this tendency enables introducing virtual bodies
of power first, then informal government in the face of well-organized
public groups. In this very Armenian reality there were a number of
people who realized this reality a long time ago and implemented some,
though limited, objectives for conducting a foreign policy of
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. A lot has been done, this project may
develop, set up new obliging contacts, reach new arrangements. The
international community gets information on the situation in the South
Caucasus from corporations of young people in a number of countries,
which got excellent education and were brought up in patriotic (in a
number of cases also traditionally Dashnak families). This information
and not the demonstrative talks of the NKR president underlies the
important government papers.

Did it occur to these unconscious elements in Stepanakert that
they have the prerogative to represent the interests of Karabakh? Let
nobody forget that NKR is an unrecognized state, which means that this
state can be represented by those who have proved to their external
partners their right, actuality and ability. International politics has
many facets, besides the public politics there is also a non-public
politics, and though the essence is in details, the details are not for
everyone. A friend of mine from Baku says: "It is not for mediocrities."

It is possible to guarantee the success of the NKR election. Each
candidate for president will have to explain in detail their attitude
towards the factual borders of NKR. By the way, the problem of
settlement does not need to be explained, it is pointless. But they will
have to explain the problem of factual borders. We will try to prompt an
idea to our compatriots, a great and indisputable idea which
distinguishes great nations. This is the strongest idea in the human
society. Today these people accept sops and sell not only their vote but
also the future of their children, and tomorrow they do a revolution of
world importance. It is important to understand what we want in reality,
in this definite situation, without fools, but it is also possible with
fools. I guess Albert Camus said: "Diagnosis is above everything except
honor."

21-05-2007 17:09:21