PRESS RELEASE
Armenian Center for National and International Studies
75 Yerznkian Street
Yerevan 0033, Armenia
Tel: (+374 – 10) 52.87.80 or 27.48.18
Fax: (+374 – 10) 52.48.46
Email: [email protected] or [email protected]
Website:
June 25, 2009
ACNIS Holds Roundtable Discussion on `Crisis in Iran: Lessons for Armenia’
Yerevan–The Armenian Center for National and International Studies
(ACNIS) convened a roundtable discussion today, entitled `Crisis in
Iran: Lessons for Armenia,’ assessing the recent post-election crisis
in Iran and examining the lessons for Armenia.
After welcoming the nearly fifty participants, ACNIS Director of
Administration Dr. Karapet Kalenchian presented a brief introduction
of recent developments in Iran within a broader context of Armenia’s
relations with Iran, explaining that `the future course of the
strategic relationship between Yerevan and Tehran was largely
dependent and affected by the outcome of Iran’s ongoing political
crisis.’
ACNIS Director Richard Giragosian then presented an assessment of
recent developments in Armenia’s southern neighbor Iran, which has
been gripped by a powerful, and at times, even violent post-election
crisis that has seen the largest anti-government demonstrations since
the 1979 Iranian revolution, with hundreds of thousands of Iranian
citizens protesting a disputed presidential election. He argued that
the `post-election unrest poses the most serious challenge to the
Iranian authorities since they came to power in the wake of the
Iranian revolution twenty years ago.’ In addition, he noted that `the
current wave of unrest is largely directed against the ruling elite,
although it is not, at least yet, targeting the system itself.’
After providing a focused analysis of the Iranian crisis, Giragosian
also presented several important lessons for Armenia, including the
fact that `Iran is now facing its own March 1st post-election crisis,
similar to the events in Armenia last year’ and, in both cases, `led
to the tragic deaths of civilian demonstrators after the use, and
misuse, of force, with police and security forces applying an
excessive and repressive response to the demonstrations.’ He went on
to say that `in Armenia’s case, the March 2008 crisis remains
unresolved, as the authorities have been unable or unwilling to fully
and fairly investigate the events of March 2008′ and warned that
`Armenia, like Iran, is plagued by a failure to adequately resolve the
underlying tension and demands emanating from that crisis.’
Giragosian explained that another lesson for Armenia from the current
crisis in Iran was the fact that the election revealed that `very
serious domestic contradictions quickly developed into a highly
volatile and explosive internal situation that no ideology, no mater
how powerful, could contain.’ And, `for the Armenian authorities,
this lesson also includes a warning: that there can be no political
panacea or substitute for not addressing concrete socio-economic
problems. And with Iran, it is also clear that the recent crisis has
shown that no country in this modern world can remain truly isolated,’
he added.
He concluded by noting that the third lesson from Iran, the `economics
of change’ as a driving force behind this tension that was even more
worrisome for Armenia. In both cases, he argued, `young Iranians and
Armenians share the same hopes, for a brighter future, for economic
opportunities, and for a voice in how their country is governed.’ He
then warned that `for both countries, there is no return to the
pre-crisis status quo, as the political and economic demands for
change remain unmet, and to continue to ignore these basic demands and
natural expectations, sparks a real risk of only prolonging the
crisis, and most dangerously, of merely fueling the fire of
discontent.’
In closing, Giragosian stated that `in terms of the outlook for
Armenian-Iranian relations, there are both inherent limits, such as
the Russian pressure on Armenia over the size of the gas pipeline to
prevent the re-export of gas beyond Armenia, and inherent
opportunities,’ arguing that `Armenia can play a role as a strategic
bridge to Iran, and as a platform for Russia, the EU and the US to
engage Iran.’
ACNIS Senior Analyst Manvel Sargsian provided a presentation on the
recent events in Iran and said that the protests in Iran revealed `a
lack of confidence in the Iranian government and a challenge to the
legitimacy’ of the leadership. He went on to say that the crisis was
unprecedented and can be seen as tied to the international context, in
terms of Iran’s isolation and pressure on its leaders. He then closed
by noting that the West was cautious in its response but that the real
challenge was from Iran itself.
The two presentations were then followed by a series of questions and
answers, as well as a lively exchange among two Armenian
parliamentarians, leading Armenian analysts, experts and journalists.
———————————— ———————————
The Armenian Center for National and International Studies (ACNIS) is
a leading independent strategic research center located in Yerevan,
Armenia. As an independent, objective institution committed to
conducting professional policy research and analysis, ACNIS strives to
raise the level of public debate and seeks to broaden public
engagement in the public policy process, as well as fostering greater
and more inclusive public knowledge. Founded in 1994, ACNIS is the
institutional initiative of Raffi K. Hovannisian, Armenia’s first
Minister of Foreign Affairs. Over the past fifteen years, ACNIS has
acquired a prominent reputation as a primary source of professional
independent research and analysis covering a wide range of national
and international policy issues.
For further information on the Center call (37410) 52-87-80 or
27-48-18; fax (37410) 52-48-46; email [email protected] or [email protected];
or visit