DISCUSSION "VULGARITY VS. POLITICAL DEBATE"
Spotlight / Events
The Civilitas Foundation
Tuesday, 07 July 2009 14:00
More than a hundred guests were present at the public discussion
on "Vulgarity vs. Political Debate", organised by the Civilitas
Foundation on 7 July. The speakers were Artsvik Minasyan, member
of the ARF faction of the National Assembly, Hranush Kharatyan,
a noted ethnographer and public commentator, and Naira Melkumyan,
former foreign minister of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic and founder
of the "Aybengir" publishing house. Opening the discussion, Civilitas
Foundation director Salpi Ghazarian spoke on how the absence of a
culture of political debate within Armenia forces us to seek platforms
elsewhere. Thus when we do not have the means to defend our rights in
Armenian courts, we are compelled to appeal to the European Court of
Human Rights, or if there is no possibility of debate in Armenia’s
parliament, the issue moves to the Parliamentary Assembly of the
Council of Europe.
According to Hranush Kharatyan, there are two reasons for the
absence of debate when it comes to the most serious issues. First, the
Armenian authorities have until now enforced a culture which dictates,
"There is no debate in Armenia. There is instead the simple means
of presenting oneself as correct and defaming all others. Secondly,
it is very easy to label someone as a traitor instead of20sitting
down, discussing, thinking, coming up with solutions, that is to say,
instead of analysis and drawing conclusions".
Hranush Kharatyan also stated, "Instead they remember the many
incidents when they slandered each other. And society hears how,
‘this one is such a horrible man’, ‘that one is such a rascal’,
‘that person is a crook’, etc., which probably contains some truth,
in reality. But this is not what is meant by discussion. And the
phenomenon of political debate is surprisingly completely absent in the
media. Until our most influential political forces, or those who claim
to be such, don’t analyse the views of their opponents themselves,
or, by analysing their views, they do not present their own, we will
not have such a real culture of debate".
"In Armenia, the word ‘tolerance’ means ‘obedience’. The authorities
have, in reality, their subjects and one expects obedience from
subjects, which they refer to as ‘tolerance’, whereas the word
‘tolerance’, in broad terms, consists of deep philosophy, which, first
of all, implies that someone more open-minded and with greater capacity
must discuss the issue with tolerance, and if he is mistaken, he must
try to acknowledge the error and reconstruct his approach. Such a
phenomenon is practically completely absent in our society", Hranush
Kharatyan said.
The deputy of the ARF faction of the National Assembly Artsvik Minasyan
stated that, unfortunately, the parliament has not become the place
where essential political discussions are held.
"We have something else instead: discussions on the streets (and by
‘streets’ here I mean outside of the parliament and not discussions
of the organized civil society). And it seems that anything said, any
such opinion becomes, unfortunately, widely acknowledged in society,"
the parliamentarian said.
He also stated that he wouldn’t have approached Azerbaijani or Turkish
representatives himself, but this does not mean that what has been
going on with regards to Zaruhi Postanjyan was just.
"If we have a delegation which represents Armenia and which is headed
by a representative of the ruling party, I believe that the head of
delegation has to chiefly bear the responsibility, a responsibility
by which he ought to have been able, first of all, to reconcile those
disagreements. And if he wasn’t able to do so, then only could he
have taken other steps, and not immediately condemn an act, with
regards to the details of which many members of the delegation, in
their own words, ‘did not have a problem’. I myself have a problem
with those details. But if they did not have such a problem, then an
astonishing question presents itself: why did you all not sign? Had
they been among 0Athe five co-signatories, this person would not have
to go to the Turks or Azerbaijanis", Artsvik Minasyan said.
The former NKR foreign minister Naira Melkumyan said, "The campaign
which has started against Zaruhi Postanjyan is going to have very
negative consequences in foreign policy, because those European bodies
with which we co-operate, from which we expect something or other,
will be well aware of the consequences of her initiative. No one
is going to be interested in why that was the case. The result will
be that such treatment is awaiting to maverick women politicians in
Armenia, and that will soon become a foreign policy issue for Armenia".
Naira Melkumyan also thinks that many active women do not enter
politics in Armenia, "because they are afraid of such intolerance".
Human rights advocate Avetik Ishkhanyan agreed, that when insults are
hurled instead of holding political debates, as in the case of Zaruhi
Postanjyan, then the question must be resolved through the courts.
"But let us keep one thing in mind. Ultimately, if we tried to solve
this issue through judicial authority, then the Sword of Damocles
would hang above the opposition, because no figure in power would
testify in court.
This is the very problem. It is a vicious circle, whose solution
(as I have always said) is to create an independent judiciary. All
surveys we have held have shown a 2% trust in court20decisions. We
need to have at least 50% confidence so that any court decision,
with regards to any person, would not be perceived as having been
dictated from the authorities, or as a limitation of the freedom of
speech of the opposition," the human rights advocate said.
According to Avetik Ishkhanyan, no real debates have taken
place in Armenia since 1995. Instead, there have only been "mutual
insults". This was the case during the Soviet times, when, for example,
any academic disagreement between scholars would be rendered personal
enmities, leading to clashes among different factions, even to the
point of losing one’s job and getting persecuted. "That political
counter-culture has manifested itself in such ways that a constructive
opposition would be viewed around here as simply that opposition
which speaks without insults.
And the real opposition is considered only to be that which makes
its declarations in a coarse, insulting manner," the activist said.
To add to this, Aghavni Karakhanyan, director of the Institute for
Civil Society and Regional Development, stated that political culture
is primarily formed by regular people, based on their conduct.
"We form part of that system. And what sort of conduct are we
displaying in these circumstances, as individuals, as politicians,
as representatives of NGOs? I believe that the fault lies not with
the state, not with an organisat ion, but with us, with each of
us. While saying those words, did we think about whether we could
respond when asked why we said so? I do not see in our society that
any person can bear the responsibility for what he or she says,"
Aghavni Karakhanyan remarked.
Another participant in the discussion, member of the ARF faction of
the National Assembly Lilit Galstyan, stated that when it comes to the
involvement of women in politics, among 125 parliaments in the world,
Armenia ranks 106th, next to developing countries in Africa.
She believes that what happened with regards to Zaruhi Postanjyan shows
that, "the issues and their causes run much deeper. Most unfortunately,
the sort of political culture that we have seems to exclude healthy
debate, and we find ourselves in an environment of extremes".
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
