TER-PETROSYAN – THE CHIEF OGANIZER OF "MARCH 1"
Lilit Poghosyan

Hayots Ashkhar
Published on March 06, 2008

Yesterday, during regular meeting with the journalists, President
ROBERT KOCHARYAN first expressed condolences to the relatives of the
people who had died as a result of the massive disorders organized
on March 1

Head of the Republic expressed belief that "imposing a state of
emergency was a must. If that method hadn’t been applied, the losses
would be greater and the consequences – much graver. The complete
picture of the events will be restored by each minute. There are a lot
of materials and video records, and this enables the law enforcement
agencies to make proper assessments and carry out activities of
relevant volumes."

Despite the unprecedented nature of the number and "geography" of the
people involved in the criminal case instituted at the beginning of
spring in connection with the "criminal revolution", the investigative
group is entirely capable of restoring the complete picture of the
incident and, on the recommendation of the President, inform the public
on daily basis "what is being done, in what volumes and direction".

The President divided the participants of the disorders into three
groups, "The first are the organizers who arranged the gatherings
of the people in front of the Mayor’s Office; as a result, serious
clashes were provoked." The latter can conventionally be divided into
two parts: ‘hawks" which simply "provoked clashes in a very aggressive
manner. The most outstanding figure among them was Nikol Pashinyan.

But there were also such people as David Shahnazaryan who, realizing
that the situation was going beyond control, tried to appease the
crowd. But the crowd mostly obeyed the provokers."

The second group includes "those who organized attacks on the police by
using arms and explosives. The responsibility for the victims mostly
falls upon this particular group. Their activities caused deaths
and a lot of people were wounded. There are 130 wounded people,
the majority being policemen. And those attacks on the police bore
an organized nature."

The third group consists of the so-called "peaceful demonstrators"
who did not participate in the attacks on the law enforcers; instead,
they actively participated in the plunder. The approaches towards
these groups will be naturally dependent upon the degree of the
dangerousness of their deeds.

Nevertheless, R. Kocharyan is convinced that "it will be very
unfair if, without punishing the organizers and perpetrators, the
law enforcers impose measures on the people who fell prey to those
demonstrations. Everyone should receive the kind of punishment he
deserves, the kind of punishment he has earned by his activity. And of
course, it is first of all necessary to punish the organizers, those
who drove the people out of control, turning the crowd into a mob.

And no one in the course of history has ever managed to control a
mob. When you gather people, you must also bear responsibility for
them and think about the possible consequences." It is necessary
to demonstrate a special attitude towards those who used arms and
explosives, "It is approximately known to us in what circles they were
searched, but it should be mentioned that both the organizers and
the people belonging to that stratum are simply evading the justice
system now."

Can the state of emergency be extended or, vice versa, removed ahead
of time? "The state of emergency was declared for a period of 20 days,
and I presently see no necessity for either extending or reducing
that time limit. We must first of all try to clarify the list and
the place of the organizers. Before removing the state of emergency,
we must be confident that illegal actions of the type will not
be repeated. Today there is no such confidence because people who
have used arms and explosives are there in the street. Unless we
have the clear-cut answers to those questions, we cannot remove the
state of emergency and then become faced with graver consequences,"
R. Kocharyan is convinced.

In response to the question of the journalist from the Georgian
"Roustavi" TV Channel, the President touched upon the most recent
tensions on the Armenian-Azerbaijani border zone. "The Azeris occupied
one of the Armenian positions, but after prompt and decisive return
operations the status quo was restored. There are two injured people
from the Armenian side.

Our Ministry of Defense contacted the Azerbaijani Ministry of Defense,
and as a result, an agreement was reached on discontinuing the
firing. Our positions were fired from mine throwers. Nothing of the
kind had happened for a long time. I believe we’ll manage to settle
the situation and restore the ceasefire regime.

Although Azerbaijan has decided that the current situation in Armenia
has blunted the vigilance of the NK armed forces or some large military
subdivisions have been moved to Armenia from Karabakh. There’s
nothing of the kind; the efficiency of the Armenian forces is on a
proper level. But I don’t think it is politically correct to use such
situations with other purposes."

As regards the dialogue with the pro-Ter-Petrosyan opposition, the
President made the following statement, "They themselves have refused
to have a dialogue with this particular part of the Opposition. This
was mentioned many times during the rallies. Ter-Petrosyan announced
that his dwelling was the Freedom Square from where he was to be
taken to the presidential palace.

Such statements block the path for a dialogue.

Besides, the newly elected President of Armenia almost immediately
expressed willingness to cooperate with all the pro-Opposition forces;
almost all the candidates responded to his offer, with the exception
of Mr. Ter-Petrosyan.

We have always been for a dialogue. Simply, one of the candidates
relied on the radical electorate and was trying to polarize the
situation to the maximum. Perhaps, his electorate was not inclined to
a conversation" or maybe, he avoided a dialogue for fear of losing the
"efficiency" of that electorate; and we all became the eyewitness of
such efficiency.

Why wasn’t LTP "given the opportunity" to join the activists
crowded near the Mayor’s Office and guard them against spontaneous
violence? "That thesis does not, mildly speaking, correspond to
the reality. What’s the idea of the statement ‘he wasn’t given
the opportunity’? Who prevented him from going and joining the
demonstrators?" R. Kocharyan said in response to the question.

LTP’s bodyguards were not obliged to do anything, and they refused
to be present at the illegal protest of the "defendant", but "he
was free to go there without guards. And if he was afraid for his
own security, he should have been concerned about the security of
those who had gathered the. He should have been manly enough to go
and participate in the demonstration. But the goals were different."

By the way, L. Ter-Petrosyan informed the President through "third
persons", i.e. the National Security officials, that he wanted
to go and appease the people. And the response was, "We will only
welcome that; if you can, go and appease them." But instead, the
revolutionary leader presented an ultimatum that he intended to lead
his own people to the Freedom Square and continue the demonstration
boom for an additional period of 15 days. Furthermore, the ultimatum
was presented after the situation was beyond control and the barricaded
mob attacked the policemen with clubs and metal poles.

"Do you imagine what would have happened if the mob had reached the
Opera along Mashtots Avenue? What would have been the situation in the
capital city? He was told that the offer was delayed," R. Kocharyan
noted, expressing a hesitation as to how that person could have sat
at home the whole night, knowing that his proponents were plundering
shops, setting cars on fire and rebelling against the law enforcers.

What’s much more extraordinary according to the President is that
Ter-Petrosyan refused to receive the Catholicos (supreme patriarch) of
All Armenians. His Holiness had previously informed of his intention
to visit LTP with a peacemaking mission. Even though the President
didn’t believe in the effectiveness of the meeting, he welcomed the
initiative saying, "Even if there is a small likelihood to attain
some result, it must be done."

But what happened is unbelievable. "His Holiness went there and wasn’t
simply let in. It’s just perplexing. I would never have imagined that
any Armenian in any part of the world could refuse to receive His
Holiness in his place. Perhaps, it seemed to him that he was riding
a horse, and the authorities were in panic; or, maybe, he thought
that I had asked His Holiness to visit him and considered that the
meeting was not advantageous to him." Thus, he missed the chance of
overcoming the situation in a more or less dignified manner.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress