Dikran Abrahamian MD, Ontario,
More than a month ago the people of Armenia
flooded downtown Yerevan declaring “Velvet Revolution”. It’s, of course,
up to the people in the homeland and their representatives to chart a
new future. As observers from the Diaspora, we can only speculate what
course this “revolution” may take. The situation is fluid; some might
aver that we should not comment because we run the risk of being out of
date within days if not hours. However, the urgency of the situation
forces our hand.
In a previous article, we opined about the Herculean task
the new administration faces. It appears that under the heavy weight of
that responsibility the administration has opted for the easy way out.
What we have seen is no revolution but an almost-aborted strong popular
movement with rightful aspirations for a better and fair distribution of
wealth under the rule of law. Revolutions create their own institutions
to implement their socio-economic programs. So far there has been no
sign or appreciable willingness to that end.
The administration is asking the "impatient"
sectors of people to calm down and be patient. To what end? It’s wishful
thinking that change can take place within the parameters of a flawed
undemocratic constitution in which the administration has boxed in
itself. A case in point is the reforming of the judiciary system. Under
the articles of the present constitution, it may take forever to
promulgate true reform that will respond to the call for an untainted
judiciary. [Article 166. Procedure for Election and Appointment of
Judges].
It is true that energetic but inexperienced young
people have taken various administrative positions. Unfortunately, this
is more of a cosmetic change rather than real progress. How can we
explain the presence of representatives of the old regime in the new
administration? Who is co-opting whom?
There are calls for economic reform. The
administration seems to be intent to follow the prescriptions of
neo-liberalism. Does such an aim make sense when neo-liberalism itself
gave rise to the oligarchic system not only in Armenia but throughout
the world? Unfortunately, in the past almost three decades, since the
implosion of the Soviet Union the people in Armenia and elsewhere were
constantly bombarded by a narrative that democratic values have a life
of their own divorced from economic underlying systems. Western
democratic values, norms and economic standards were praised without an
all-important footnote. They wilfully neglected to mention that Western
democracies today enjoy those benefits, primarily the economic fruits,
thanks to the exploitation of Africa, and a good part of Asia and Latin
America.
The panacea for Armenia and many failed states is
not neo-liberalism. For one thing, Armenia is under the partial colonial
rule of oligarchic Russia that can tip the balance at any moment.
Environmentalists, socialists, and progressive-minded intellectuals of
all stripes in Armenia should have the courage to iron out their
secondary differences, boldly engage the public with the intent of
educating it about the relation of real democracy and underlying
economic factors. They should present a unified coherent program of
change based on the realities of Armenia by clearly defining the limits
of ownership, the societal ills of monopolies and the role of the state
in areas that affect the vast majority of the people, such as education,
health and welfare of the most economically vulnarable people in
society. People of Armenia deserve better; they do not need another
round of neo-liberalism.
The visionaries of our traditional parties, the
Armenagans, Hunchaks and Dashnaks, were ahead of their times. Their
voices were silenced because of the Genocide and unforeseen
international developments. They advocated solutions based on
circumstances that our people lived in the Ottoman and Russian empires.
They made many mistakes, but their vision is more valid today than at
any other time.
There are those who will mock this assessment,
especially in the West. It does not surprise us. They are simply
expressions of the economic environment that they live in and enjoy its
benefits. It’s understandable. We are talking about our brethren in
Armenia. Projecting a lifestyle that is ours in the west unto Armenia is
irrational. The socio-economic bases are different and require
solutions other than what’s experienced in the West.
Will you mock the Scandinavian experiment, the
envy of millions of ordinary people both in the developed democracies
and in failed states? Will you mock 1.4 billion China that exercises a
hybrid system? Will you mock the attempts of many Latin American
countries that are trying to establish a fairer society right under the
nose of U.S? What’s the difference between an oligarchic Russia and
imperialist U.S that exploits as much as it can the rest of the world
but keeps its own people at bay by satisfying their minimal economic
needs? The difference, as far as we are concerned, are in the methods,
not the content.
The popular movement in Armenia that started in
mid-April should continue its perpetual activism until its
socio-economic demands are met. Foremost, immediate extraordinary
parliamentary elections should take place to have a representative body
that truly represents the majority of the people. It’s argued that the
administration will initiate elections once a fair electoral supervising
body is formed. How can we be so naïve that such an electoral body will
not be tainted when the majority of the present parliament is still
controlled by representatives of the old regime? The constitution
states, “The Chairperson and other members of the Central Electoral
Commission shall be elected by the National Assembly, upon
the recommendation of the competent standing committee of the National
Assembly, by at least three-fifths of votes of the total number of
Deputies.” Have faith in local representatives of people who know all
too well who can be impartial. They can form supervising bodies that
will oversee the elections. Bad apples will be inserted, yes, but it’s
worth taking the chance.
Free all political prisoners, including those
whose victims were policemen carrying their duties. There are precedents
in many jurisdictions where due to social turmoil such tragedies have
taken place. Arbitration to settle such matters by applying principles
of blood-money is not unheard of. The perpetrators unwillingly took an
action, because of political reasons. There was no premeditated murder.
Amnesty is a form of satisfying society and not necessarily individual
victims and their families. If the intent of the new administration is
to be “fair”, will it investigate and punish those who carried the 1999
massacre in parliament and also the 2008 March tragedy? Freeing the
political prisoners will provide confidence that the leaders of the
“Velvet Revolution” are truly representatives of the people’s will. It
will cement the cooperation of the majority of the people with the new
administration.
As we see it from abroad, the imperatives for the
homeland at present are immediate extraordinary parliamentary elections,
freedom to all political prisoners, and judiciary reform. The method is
the perpetual agitation of sectors of people who have a stake in the
wave of change through a broad coalition of all social forces: the
non-oligarchic middle class, the dispossessed farmers, the
enviromentally threatened villagers, the unemployed poor, the factory
workers, the veterans, the freedom fighters (ազատամարտիկ), the youth and
the intellectuals with social conscience.
While reforming Armenia's governance, let’s not
forget the other change which should be implemented in our traditional
spiritual home, namely the church. Ostensibly church and state are
separated. Yet, we have observed a close relationship between the two, a
symbiotic relation the underlying factor being the perpetuation of
oligarchy. The hierarchy of the church is rotten and often immoral. We
stand by a commentator of Keghart.com who states, “Now that the people
of Armenia have gotten rid of oligarch-in-chief Serge Sargsyan, when
will the clergy dismiss co-oligarch Karekin II, the so-called
"Catholicos of All Armenians"? […] If the clergy doesn't defrock K II
the people of Armenia should march on Echmiadzin and demand his
resignation.”