Carahunge, or Zorats Karer, is a prehistoric archaeological site near the town of Sisian in the Syunik Province of Armenia
YEREVAN—The non-governmental organization Bnorran Historic-Cultural and the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography of Armenia’s National Academy of Sciences are teaming up to study the mysterious Karahounge: the prehistoric archaeological site near the town of Sisian in the Syunik Province of Armenia, known as the Armenian Stonehenge.
The two institutions have long had conflicting opinions regarding the structure, and now they are joining forces to find out what Karahounge, aka Zorats Karer, was—an ancient astronomical observatory or a settlement that has a status of a mausoleum.
Bnorran Historic-Cultural NGO and the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography signed an agreement on July 30 to join forces.
Karahounge is often internationally referred to as the Armenian Stonehenge. The construction date of the structure is unknown—presumably sometime between the Middle Bronze Age and the Iron Age.
Bnorran Board Member, Arevik Sargsyan, believes Carahunge was an ancient astronomical observatory.
“We think Karahounge—where more than 200 stones with 80 holes are located—is an ancient astronomical observatory, which was studied by Paris Herouni, with other experts having made similar opinions prior to his,” noted Sargsyan while referring to the late physicist’s views. Dating the megalithic structure from 5,500 BC, Herouni argued that some of the stones mirror the brightest star of the Cygnus constellation—Deneb.
“According to another opinion, Karahounge isn’t an astronomical observatory. It is simply an ancient site. A settlement, which has a status of a mausoleum,” stated Sargsyan.
Director of the Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography, Pavel Avetisyan, and archaeological expedition team leader, Ashot Piliposyan, explained that not a single astronomical tool has been discovered during excavations at the site, and, moreover, some of the stones also have holes in the lower parts, which aren’t directed at the stars.
Piliposyan emphasized the uniqueness of the monument in the entire Transcaucasia.
“It requires studies in all aspects. We discussed many issues during the signing of the agreement. We even considered the idea of potentially building a museum near the monument to display materials linked to the ancient site,” noted Piliposyan.
Both parties have agreed to suspend excavations at Karahounge until a joint seminar of astronomers, archeoastronomers, archaeologists, ethnographers, naturalists, and many other experts takes place to develop an official plan and conduct research, which will lead to a more specific conclusion of the origins of the site.
A summary of the past year of Nikol Pashinyan’s term as Prime Minister, his achievements, omissions, the challenges of Armenia’s domestic and foreign policies and other topics were discussed during 168.am’s interview with Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary,Special Representative of the President of Armenia on Special Missions 1992-95 David Shahnazaryan.
168.am: How would you assess Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s domestic policy? Did he manage to fulfill all the promises that had brought people out to the streets last year?
David Shahnazaryan: It has already been a year since shift of power took place in Armenia, but these authorities haven’t achieved any positive outcome in any field over the past year. Moreover, there is regression in all sectors. Economic growth is merely nominal, but in reality, there is economic decline since there is less external trade and particularly export, meaning Armenia is losing external markets. Emigration is on the rise, operating businesses are shutting down, the external debt has grown, and there is tremendous capital outflow. The money transfers of natural persons from foreign countries to Armenia comprised $1,188,000,000 last year alone. This exclusively refers to the funds sent from Armenia through the banking system. This is a huge amount for the Armenian economy. This means the capital is flowing out. Direct investments have decreased by 11 times in the first quarter of this year compared to the same period of last year (prior to shift of power).
The tax burden has increased, and the fight against corruption is strictly selective and is of the nature of political persecutions. In particular, a significant part of oligarchs is under the control of the incumbent government, while there is racketeering for the other part.
It has been declared that there is no systemic corruption, but in reality, not only do all the mechanisms for this exist, but there are also new schemes. For instance, the wife of the Prime Minister has established two so-called charitable foundations that are compelling businessmen to transfer funds to those foundations. The activities of these foundations are not transparent, and the director of those foundations, that is, the wife of the Prime Minister, has publicly announced that “it would be better to transfer the funds stolen from the state budget to the foundations”.
During the reign of the incumbent authorities, in one year, Armenia has essentially regressed from the path to becoming a legal state. There is clearly a retreat from democracy. There is regression in the fields of human rights protection and freedom of press. The presses that aren’t submissive to the Prime Minister are persecuted and repressed. It is more than likely that there will be specific punitive actions against the disobedient media outlets following the “reforms” in the judiciary.
With total control over the executive and legislative powers, Prime Minister Pashinyan is now trying to make the judiciary completely subject to him, and the transformations of the judiciary that he has already started making, will only serve that goal.
I must state the fact that Armenia has never had a leader with such great personal (personal, not the power of a political party or a group of people) power as Pashinyan currently has. Both the executive and legislative authorities are under his absolute subordination, and now he is trying to do the same thing with the judiciary. Pashinyan himself declared the following twice: “There is not one judge in Armenia who can say ‘no’ to me”. Now he is trying to have courts that will be submissive and obedient.
The actions that the Prime Minister has already committed against the judiciary and the blockade of all the courts of Armenia by his order are crude violations of constitutional order and criminally punishable acts. The Ambassadors of EU member states to the Republic of Armenia, the U.S. Embassy, the President of the Venice Commission, the heads of the PACE Monitoring Committee and the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe issued statements and clearly stated that the whole process of judicial-legal reforms needs to be implemented within the scope of the Constitution.
There has been absolutely no real reform. The conglomeration of a couple of ministries has nothing to do with systemic reforms. Moreover, the National Assembly, which is completely subject to the Prime Minister, has not only failed to adopt a law targeted at systemic reforms, but is also considering laws that overtly serve corruption functions and specific interests. This particularly refers to the bill on making amendments to the law on the activities of bookmakers.
However, the world’s bank experts have warned that there can’t be any tangible outcome in the social and economic sectors, if systemic reforms are made slowly, and this may become a reason for more turbulence in Armenia.
Of course, all this is said under the veil of democracy. There are still circles in Europe that are not well aware of the domestic and foreign political processes unfolding in Armenia and believe the democracy that won in Armenia is the democracy that they picture.
Of course, all the points I mentioned, and not only those points, need to be presented thoroughly, but to fit them in an interview, to put it shortly, these are the outcomes of the activities that the Prime Minister has carried out in Armenia over the past year.
168.am: Are there also serious omissions in the foreign policy that the country is leading? Generally speaking, what kind of foreign policy should the Republic of Armenia adopt?
David Shahnazaryan: Armenia is Russia’s strategic ally, and it has to maintain and expand its relations with that country, but also aspire to minimize the asymmetry in those relations and at least maintain the level of confidence that the two countries had in each other in the past. At the same time, due to its tactical and strategic interests for national security, Armenia is simply obliged to lead a balanced, multi-vector and active foreign policy since Armenia’s relations with its neighboring countries (Georgia and Iran), the US, the European Union, EU member states, as well as China are extremely important. The former authorities managed to make tangible progress to a certain extent in this regard. The foreign policy of the past year is the most vulnerable spot of the incumbent authorities, and it is much more vulnerable than my aforementioned evaluations of the country’s domestic policy and the issues that I didn’t mention.
Currently, Armenia’s relations with Russia appear prima facie to be normal, but it is clear that there is no mutual trust, to say the least, and Moscow doesn’t perceive Pashinyan’s cabinet as a reliable partner. At the same time, the asymmetry of Armenia’s relations with Russia has essentially grown, but it is to the detriment of Armenia. Perhaps this is also one of the reasons why Moscow doesn’t view Armenia as a serious partner.
Armenia is a member state of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), but there has been an essential decline in the relations with other member states, particularly Belarus and Kazakhstan, and even the leaders of those countries have allowed themselves to have a not too respectful rhetoric on the Government of the Republic of Armenia.
In regard to the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, the incumbent authorities have made serious conceptual errors. As a result, in particular, there is a higher risk of the start of new and large-scale offensive actions on the part of Azerbaijan, but this is an extensive topic and a subject for discussion.
There is no substantial progress in the relations with Georgia, which are of exclusive significance for Armenia. Moreover, during a visit to Armenia, the President of Georgia expressed her discontent with a number of issues that have formed a part of the relations between Georgia and Armenia for many years and have always been discussed, but have never been made public.
The relations with Armenia’s neighboring Iran are uncertain, to say the least. Major projects were declared during Nikol Pashinyan’s visit to Iran, but no action has been taken. Those projects aren’t even mentioned. There are also some signs showing that Iran doesn’t view our government as a serious partner either.
China’s role in the region is growing, and there is recently positive dynamics in the relations between China and Armenia, but Beijing is interested in Armenia in the regional context, and when Armenia’s relations with Georgia and Iran aren’t developing, Armenia can lose the current perspective for relations with China.
The relations with the European Union, which are of major significance for Armenia, are, in essence, the only direction of Armenia’s foreign policy in which there is a clear-cut agenda, but this was the policy of the former authorities, that is, the EU-Armenia Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement (CEPA) signed in 2017.
However, in spite of the optimistic assessments of the EU, in reality, this agenda is no longer a priority, and the incumbent authorities aren’t paying enough attention to it. In particular, Pashinyan’s cabinet refused to introduced provisions of the CEPA in the 2019 Program of the Government, the roadmap for implementation was adopted after a long delay, and it was adopted by the decision of the Prime Minister, not the National Assembly or government. Perhaps the reason for this is that Pashinyan is certain that his government is incapable of implementing the roadmap, and he can make a change with his signature and without causing uproar. The launch of negotiations over liberalization of the visa regime will come late, at least a year. There are also several other omissions.
Let us mention that Pashinyan launched relations with the EU with his first visit to Brussels, declaring that he made a “velvet revolution” and the EU must provide great financial assistance to Armenia for that, but in response, the EU representatives told him that the EU supports real reforms, not “revolutions”.
No progress has been made in the relations with the member states of the European Union. The incumbent government of Armenia isn’t able to form an agenda with the US or offer an agenda to Washington. Moreover, the relations between the US and Armenia have never been at such a low level since Armenia’s declaration of independence.
The relations with the North-Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) are not smooth either, and this is clear, particularly in regard to participation in the joint military exercises as well.
In closing, as an overall evaluation, I can say that these authorities are leading the country’s domestic and foreign policies with their “revolutionary” agenda. They are not only implementing this agenda in Armenia, but are also trying to implement it in Russia and Europe, but this is a major mistake.
Although Pashinyan has declared that he doesn’t believe in any ideology and the time of –isms is over, he is trying to turn Armenia into a state with the ideology of “revolution” because there is no more content in the “revolution”, and he is leading an ideologized foreign policy. This is condemnable. For instance, the former USSR was an ideologized country, but it would lead a clearly expressed and very pragmatic foreign policy. In their speeches and at international platforms, Armenia’s government officials fail to present their vision for the government’s foreign policy and security, but devote themselves to the “velvet revolution”, which has become an advertisement for them. It doesn’t interest international partners and it doesn’t serve as a ground for deepening relations. During the recent congress of the Civil Contract Party, the leaders of the Republic of Armenia said the following: “Armenia is the bastion of freedom and democracy in the world today, yes, not the US and not Europe, and the success of democracy in the world will depend greatly on the question whether Armenian democracy will be a success or not.” First, as I mentioned, in Armenia there is essential regression from freedoms and democracy, and many second countries can simply perceive this as an insult.
Foreign policy is the major component of the national security of the Republic of Armenia and is as important as the Armed Forces, and it requires great efforts, professionalism, consistency, more pragmatism and resources, but not turning the “velvet revolution” into an item on the foreign policy agenda.
168.am: It is known that, recently, after your speech entitled “Armenia’s Foreign Policy and the Nagorno-Karabakh Issue” as a guest lecturer at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO), the presses released information in which it was particularly stated that you had called on having Russia go against Pashinyan’s government. In an interview with 168.am, you sharply denied the news and stated that this was slander was directly oriented by Prime Minister Pashinyan. Pro-Rector of the Moscow State Institute of International Relations Evgeny Kozhokin has also denied the new on the website. What do you have to say about this?
David Shahnazaryan: Yes, I did receive an invitation from the administration of the MGIMO, and I delivered a speech there on May 24. After that, the press supporting Pashinyan spread such slander that I had touched upon. Of course, nobody responded to my reflection, but they continue to act against me. The diplomatic missions of the Republic of Armenia in Brussels, the capitals of EU member states, as well as Ukraine and Georgia are ordered to spread slander.
Once again, I would like to repeat that the news spread by the authorities are rumors and absolute slander which, as you mentioned, Pro-Rector of the MGIMO Evgeny Kozhokin, who was moderating the discussion, also denied. Besides, this is a violation of the laws of Armenia since making such a call to any outside force is a criminally punishable act. The most important thing is that this is morally unacceptable for me, and throughout my political career, I have neither done this nor even thought of doing such a thing and have always condemned such attempts. This is simply slander against political opponents and is the working style of Pashinyan and his close ones. They are doing this because they have no counterargument to those same foreign policy issues, but I have also thoroughly presented facts about the conceptual errors and omissions that are being made in the process of negotiations over the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and the long chain of losses, but I have not received any substantial response. Now Pashinyan and his close ones are trying to act in this manner.
As I already mentioned, there are circles in Europe that are poorly informed about Armenia’s domestic and foreign policies and wrongly believe that democratic processes are unfolding in Armenia. Once again, I would like to emphasize the fact that domestic political issues are exclusively the issues of Armenia, and no outside force should become entangled in our internal affairs and our domestic agenda.
Նրանք մասնավորապես ներկայացրել են «Ասիական քաղաքակրթությունները եւ արդի Ասիայի զարգացումը» թեմայի վերաբերյալ հայաստանյան մոտեցումները` ընդգծելով Երեւանի ռազմավարական տեղակայումը` անցյալում, ներկայում եւ ապագայում` որպես «Մեկ գոտի, մեկ ճանապարհ» նախաձեռնության յուրօրինակ քաղաքակրթական հենակետ:
Մեկ շաբաթվա ընթացքում ՌԱՀՀԿ ներկայացուցիչները հանդիպել են չինացի պաշտոնյաների ու միջազգային մասնակիցների հետ, այցելել հետազոտական մի շարք կենտրոններ եւ ակադեմիական հաստատություններ:
Չինաստանի նախագահ Սի Ծինփինի եւ Չինաստանի սոցիալական գիտությունների ակադեմիայի ու Համաշխարհային ռազմավարության ազգային ինստիտուտի հյուրընկալած այս կարեւոր համաժողովին ներկա էին նաեւ մի շարք կառավարությունների ղեկավարներ, այդ թվում` ՀՀ վարչապետ Նիկոլ Փաշինյանը, առաջատար քաղաքական վերլուծաբան Ստեփան Գրիգորյանը, ՀՀ ԳԱԱ հիմնարար գիտական գրադարանի գիտական ղեկավար, դոկտոր Տիգրան Զարգարյանը:
——————————————————————————-
Ռազմավարական եւ ազգային հետազոտությունների հայկական կենտրոնը Երեւանում գտնվող առաջատար վերլուծական հաստատություն է: Որպես շահույթ չհետապնդող հիմնարկություն, որը հանձնառու է իրականացնելու բազմագիտակարգ, արհեստավարժ հետազոտություններ ու վերլուծություններ, այն ձգտում է բարձրացնել համազգային դիսկուրսի մակարդակը եւ ընդլայնել քաղաքացիական ներգրավվածությունը քաղաքականության կայացման գործընթացում՝ խթանելով առավել համապարփակ հանրային գիտելիքներ: Հիմնադրված լինելով 1994թ. ՀՀ արտաքին գործերի առաջին նախարար Րաֆֆի Հովհաննիսյանի կողմից, ՌԱՀՀԿ-ն տարիների ընթացքում ձեռք է բերել ազգային եւ միջազգային քաղաքականության հարցերի լայն շրջանակը փորձագիտական վերլուծության ենթարկող առաջնային աղբյուրի նշանակալի համբավ:
Լրացուցիչ տեղեկությունների համար կարող եք դիմել ՌԱՀՀԿ` Երեւան, Երզնկյան 75, հեռախոս` (37410) 528-780 կամ 274-818, հեռապատճեն` (37410) 52-48-46, էլ. փոստ` եւ [email protected], կայքէջ` www.acnis.am:
Destroyed Christian cemetery in the occupied territories of Cyprus. Photo by the Cypriot Federation in the UK
A recent British report on the persecution of Christians around the world features shocking incidents of religious persecution, harassment and destruction inside the Turkish-occupied territories of northern Cyprus.
Philip Mounstephen, the Bishop of Truro in Cornwall, presided over a team of experts who recently analyzed several cases of Christian prosecution around the world, among which Cyprus’ incidents held a prominent place. Mounstephen helmed the project at the command of the British Foreign Office.
The report concluded with the shocking fact that Christians are the most persecuted religious group in the entire world. This is a reality that Western societies have not acknowledged, since Western Christians are seen to enjoy basic religious freedom, without often considering the open persecution which is happening in other parts of the world.
Cyprus is a prominent example of how a European Union state can not only remain under the military occupation of another country, but have its Christian population continue to suffer from Turkish persecution.
The Cathedral of Saint Nicholas and later Saint Sophia in Cyprus’ occupied city of Famagusta. It was converted into a mosque in 1571 and is still operating as such. Photo: Wikipedia
While conducting his investigation, Bishop Mountstephen asked Christos Karaolis, the President of the National Federation of Cypriots in the UK, to provide evidence regarding the current situation in the occupied territories of Cyprus.
The interim report of the British authorities underlined that the situation in northern Cyprus is far from satisfactory. It states that very single one of the Christian groups of the occupied lands of Cyprus, including the Greek Orthodox, Catholic, Armenian and Maronite, have seen their rights and their religious heritage ”utterly disrespected.”
The report suggested that confiscations of church properties, attacks on churches and properties previously owned by Christians, and instances of vandalism of church buildings have occurred frequently in the northern area of Cyprus, which is currently under Turkish occupation.
”Access for worship to the historic Christian Orthodox and Maronite churches in the area is severely restricted (only once a year if specific permission is granted in many cases) and even in the small number of churches where regular Sunday services are permitted, intrusive police surveillance is complained of and services may occasionally be closed down by force and the congregation evicted without notice,” the British report charges.
“Other churches are able to worship weekly but also complain of intrusive police surveillance. Many historic churches and associated cemeteries in the area have also been allowed to fall into disrepair, be vandalized or converted to other uses,” the report noted.
From at least 500 churches which still exist across the occupied territories, a total of seventy-seven have been converted into mosques by the Turks; twenty-eight have even been made into army depots or barracks for soldiers.
One of the most shocking charges in the report states that more than 60,000 Orthodox Christian icons are currently known to have been looted, and 20,000 additional icons are still missing, without any idea where they have ended up or if they have been completely destroyed altogether.
Cyprus remains a prominent, and heartbreaking, example of how much destruction hatred and war can bring upon humanity and the priceless, irreplaceable culture of the West.
https://eu.greekreporter.com/2019/05/15/british-report-reveals-massive-christian-persecution-in-cyprus-occupied-territories/?fbclid=IwAR3Iuts3fBp37bjRw6ACVZmw-dBkt6Z7HFb6SvqLRkMrKuJvARyh2qTKBeA
Citizen’s Day is one more opportunity to listen to citizens’ issues of concern, says Secretary of Security Council
13:12,
YEREVAN, APRIL 27, ARMENPRESS. Secretary of the Security Council of Armenia Armen Grigoryan says for him the Citizen’s Day is one more chance to talk to the citizens and listen to their issues of concern.
“This day is another chance to appreciate the citizen and talk about the role of the citizen. It’s also an opportunity to meet with the citizens and listen to their issues of concern. It’s another opportunity to appreciate the citizen and talked to him/her. For me a citizen is perfect who talks about the problems, is active and tries to control and be demanding to the leadership”, he told reporters.
Citizen’s Day is being celebrated in Armenia for the first time on the last Saturday of April.
A number of events are scheduled on this Day across the Republic.
On April 9 the Parliament adopted the bill on making amendment in the Law on Holidays and Remembrance Days. According to the bill, last Saturday of April would be celebrated as the Day of Citizen of the Republic of Armenia. In case when May 1 coincides with Saturday, the Citizen’s Day will be celebrated on the last Sunday of April.
The Armenian government has provided 124 million drams from the reserve fund for the holding of events on the occasion of the Day of the Citizen.
Edited and translated by Aneta Harutyunyan
Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein
NEW YORK—The Armenian Bar Association held a Public Servants Dinner on Thursday, April 25 at the Yale Club in New York. During the event, the organization honored United States Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein, and Robert H. Tembeckjian who is an administrator and counsel of the New York Commission on Judicial Conduct.
Rosenstein, who has played a key role in the Robert Mueller investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 elections, addressed the participants of the event. Below is his presentation, as posted on the Justice Department website.
“Peri yerego.” Good evening.
Rick, I am grateful for your friendship and for your 20 years of exceptional service to the Department of Justice — including seven years as the United States Attorney for Northern New York.
I am pleased to see several U.S. Attorneys here tonight: Geoff Berman from Southern New York, Richard Donoghue from Eastern New York, Grant Jaquith from Northern New York, and Craig Carpenito from New Jersey; as well as eight former U.S. Attorneys, and many other current and former government employees.
I am thankful to Armenian Bar Association Chair Gerard Kassabian, and Vice Chairs Kathryn Ossian and Lucy Varpetian.
My wife served on your board of governors from 1993 to 2002. I got to know many of the members, particularly the group that traveled with us to Armenia in 1994 to celebrate the 75th anniversary of the University of Yerevan.
When I met Lisa in 1988, some of her relatives viewed me as “odar,” an outsider to the culture. But recently a friend introduced me as “Armenian by Choice.” After tonight, I have an even stronger claim to be an honorary Armenian.
“Shot Shenorhagal em.” Thank you very much.
Our wedding featured an Armenian opera singer who is in the audience tonight, Maro Partamian. One of my favorite songs was “Lerner Hyreni,” or “Mountains of Armenia.” We hired the “Dark Eyes” band to play at the reception, which was great except that I chose a country song called “I Swear” by John Michael Montgomery for the first dance. It did not sound quite right with an Armenian accent.
One of Lisa’s relatives was raised in Syria, where government service was not highly valued. Before he approved of the marriage, he wanted to know when I planned to get a real job, in the private sector.
Unfortunately, many native-born Americans also are skeptical about government service. My Uncle Harold was a self-employed carpet installer. One beautiful spring afternoon in 1994, I called him from an office in the Department of Justice headquarters building. It was a Saturday. And when I told him that I was working through the weekend, he said, “I’m sorry to hear that.”
And I said, “You don’t understand. There is no place that I would rather be.”
I first walked into that building as a federal prosecutor on December 3, 1990, at age 25. I remember how honored I felt to represent the people of the United States. I will still feel the same way when I walk out for the last time next month.
I joined the Department of Justice because I believe in the mission. I stayed because I believe in the people who carry out the mission.
Our agents, analysts, and attorneys demonstrate great intellect and integrity. They possess superb academic credentials and exceptional character. They pass rigorous screening interviews and face thorough background checks every few years. They are ethical, honorable, and admirable people.
No organization with 115,000 employees is error-free. But we have serious, professional, nonpartisan internal watchdogs. We investigate credible misconduct allegations. We correct mistakes and punish wrongdoers.
I have served under five Presidents and nine Senate-confirmed Attorneys General — ten, if you count Bill Barr twice. I served mostly outside the D.C. beltway, but I worked at Department of Justice headquarters three times — four years in the early 1990s as a career prosecutor, four years in the early 2000s as a supervisor, and two years in my current job.
Our headquarters is a beautiful Depression-era building. I frequently speak about the inspiration that I draw from three aspects of the building – the art it contains; the people it employs; and the principles it represents.
There are reminders of heroes, mentors, and friends on every floor. They taught me that our Department stands for the principle that every American deserves the protection of the rule of law.
We use the term “rule of law” to describe our obligation to follow neutral principles. As President Trump pointed out, “we govern ourselves in accordance with the rule of law rather [than] … the whims of an elite few or the dictates of collective will.”
Justice Anthony Kennedy explained it this way: in a rule of law system, when you apply to a government clerk for a permit and you satisfy the objective criteria, you are not asking for a favor. You are entitled to the permit, and it is the clerk’s duty to give it to you.
The idea that the government works for the people is relatively novel. In some countries, that concept of a government bound by law to serve the people does not exist.
When I visited Armenia in 1994, the nation was emerging from seven decades of Soviet domination. Gyumri and other northern cities were not yet rebuilt after the 1988 earthquake. The six-year war with Azerbaijan was halted by a recent ceasefire, but the blockade over Nagorno-Karabakh crippled the economy.
We flew on Air Armenia, which used a shabby old Russian jet. Our plane needed to stop for fuel in Bulgaria, and we heard that the pilots paid with cash.
Armenia faced many challenges in 1994. Many skilled and educated people had left the country. When we hired a taxi to visit Lake Sevan, the driver turned off the engine at every downhill stretch to conserve gasoline.
We stayed at a nice hotel near Republic Square, but some mornings there was no water to flush the toilets, and some evenings there was no electricity to cook the food.
I gave a lecture at the University of Yerevan about public corruption. When I finished, a student raised his hand. He asked, “If you can’t pay bribes in America, then how do you get electricity?”
I repeat that question in many speeches. It usually elicits laughter. But the point is profound.
The question illustrates how that young man understood Soviet society. Corruption undermines law. It stifles innovation, creates inefficiency, and inculcates distrust.
The question explains why I devoted my career to law enforcement: because the rule of law is the foundation of human liberty. The rule of law secures our freedom. It will secure our children’s freedom. And we can only achieve it if people who enforce the law set aside partisanship, because the rule of law requires a fair and independent process; a process where all citizens are equal in the eyes of the government.
I do not care how police officers, prosecutors, and judges vote, just as I do not care how soldiers and sailors vote. That is none of my business. I only care whether they understand that when they are on duty, their job is about law and not politics.
There is not Republican justice and Democrat justice. There is only justice and injustice.
In the courtyard of the Department of Justice headquarters, there is an inscription that reads, in Latin: “Privilegium Obligatio.” It means that when you accept a privilege, you incur an obligation. Working for Justice is a privilege.
Our commensurate obligations are established by our oath to well and faithfully execute the duties of the office. To honor that oath, you need to know your office’s unique duties. At our Department, our job is to seek the truth, apply the law, follow the Department’s policies, and respect its principles.
The rule of law is our most important principle. Patriots must always defend the rule of law. Even when it is not in their personal interest, it is always in the national interest. If you find yourself asking, “What will this decision mean for me?” then you probably are not complying with your oath of office.
At my confirmation hearing in March 2017, a Republican Senator asked me to make a commitment. He said: “You’re going to be in charge of this [Russia] investigation. I want you to look me in the eye and tell me that you’ll do it right, that you’ll take it to its conclusion and you’ll report [your results] to the American people.”
I did pledge to do it right and take it to the appropriate conclusion. I did not promise to report all results to the public, because grand jury investigations are ex parte proceedings. It is not our job to render conclusive factual findings. We just decide whether it is appropriate to file criminal charges.
Some critical decisions about the Russia investigation were made before I got there. The previous Administration chose not to publicize the full story about Russian computer hackers and social media trolls, and how they relate to a broader strategy to undermine America.
The FBI disclosed classified evidence about the investigation to ranking legislators and their staffers. Someone selectively leaked details to the news media. The FBI Director announced at a congressional hearing that there was a counterintelligence investigation that might result in criminal charges. Then the former FBI Director alleged that the President pressured him to close the investigation, and the President denied that the conversation occurred.
So that happened.
There is a story about firefighters who found a man on a burning bed. When they asked how the fire started, he replied, “I don’t know. It was on fire when I lay down on it.” I know the feeling.
But the bottom line is, there was overwhelming evidence that Russian operatives hacked American computers and defrauded American citizens, and that is only the tip of the iceberg of a comprehensive Russian strategy to influence elections, promote social discord, and undermine America, just like they do in many other countries.
In 1941, as Hitler sought to enslave Europe and Japan’s emperor prepared to attack America, Attorney General Robert Jackson admonished federal prosecutors about their role in protecting national security.
He said: “Defense is not only a matter of battleships and tanks, of guns and [soldiers]…. It is raw materials, machines and [people who] work in factories. It is public morale. It is a law abiding population and a nation free from internal disorder . . . the ramparts we watch are not only those on the outer borders which are largely the concern of the military services. There are also the inner ramparts of our society — the Constitution, its guarantees, our freedoms and the supremacy of law. These are yours to guard and their protection is your defense program.”
As acting Attorney General, it was my responsibility to make sure that the Department of Justice would do what the American people pay us to do: conduct an independent investigation; complete it expeditiously; hold perpetrators accountable if warranted; and work with partner agencies to counter foreign agents and deter crimes.
Today, our nation is safer, elections are more secure, and citizens are better informed about covert foreign influence schemes.
But not everybody was happy with my decision, in case you did not notice.
It is important to keep a sense of humor in Washington. You just need to accept that politicians need to evaluate everything in terms of the immediate political impact.
Then there are the mercenary critics, who get paid to express passionate opinions about any topic, often with little or no information. They do not just express disagreement. They launch ad hominem attacks unrestricted by truth or morality. They make threats, spread fake stories, and even attack your relatives. I saw one of the professional provocateurs at a holiday party. He said, “I’m sorry that I’m making your life miserable.” And I said, “You do your job, and I’ll do mine.”
His job is to entertain and motivate partisans, so he can keep making money. My job is to enforce the law in a non-partisan way; that is the whole point of the oath of office.
In our Department, we disregard the mercenary critics and focus on the things that matter. As Goethe said, “Things that matter most must never be at the mercy of things that matter least.” A republic that endures is not governed by the news cycle. Some of the nonsense that passes for breaking news today would not be worth the paper was printed on, if anybody bothered to print it. It quickly fades away. The principles are what abide.
America’s founders understood that the rule of law is not partisan. In 1770, five American colonists died after British soldiers fired on a crowd in the Boston Massacre. The soldiers were charged with murder. Many people believed that they deserved the death penalty.
John Adams agreed to represent the soldiers. His political beliefs were firmly against them. But Adams felt obligated to protect their rights under the law.
Defending British soldiers was a very unpopular cause, to put it mildly. Adams faced a serious risk, in his words, of “infamy,” or even “death.” In a diary entry about the trial, he wrote as follows: “In the evening I expressed to Mrs. Adams all my apprehensions: That excellent Lady, who has always encouraged me, burst into…Tears….[S]he was very sensible of all the danger to her and to our children as well as to me, but she thought I had done as I ought, [and] she was…willing to share in all that was to come and place her trust in Providence.”
The rhetoric mirrors an earlier letter that Adams wrote to explain his preference for integrity over acclaim. Adams wrote that in theaters “the applause of the audience is of more importance to the actors than their own approbation. But upon the stage of life, while conscience claps, let the world hiss.”
Adams endured harsh criticism in the court of public opinion. But in the court of law, he secured the acquittal of the British captain and six soldiers.
At the trial, Adams delivered a timeless tribute to the rule of law. He said that “[f]acts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
Adams’ words remind us that people who seek the truth need to avoid confirmation bias. Truth is about solid evidence, not strong opinions. A 19th century Philadelphia doctor remarked that “sincerity of belief is not the test of truth.” Many people passionately believe things that are not true.
I spent most of my career prosecuting cases in federal courthouses. My past trials in courts of law contrast with my recent tribulations in the halls of Congress, the channels of cable television, and the pages of the internet.
The difference is in the standard of proof. In my business, we need to prove facts with credible evidence, prove them beyond any reasonable doubt, and prove them to the unanimous satisfaction of a neutral judge and an unbiased jury of 12 random citizens.
Pursuing truth requires keeping an open mind, avoiding confirmation bias, and always yielding to credible evidence. Truth may not match our preconceptions. Truth may not satisfy our hopes. But truth is the foundation of the rule of law.
If lawyers cannot prove our case in court, then what we believe is irrelevant.
But in politics, belief is the whole ball game. In politics – as in journalism – the rules of evidence do not apply. That is not a critique. It is just an observation.
Last year, a congressman explained why he decided not to run for reelection. He said, “I like … job[s] where facts matter. I like jobs where fairness matters. I like jobs where, frankly, … the process matters.”
He was describing an American courtroom. “I like the art of persuasion,” he said. “I like finding 12 people who have not already made up their minds and … may [let] the facts prevail. That’s not where we are in politics.”
That congressman spoke the truth. It may never be where we are in politics. But it must always be where we are in law.
Attorney General Jackson spoke about the fiduciary duty of government lawyers, the obligation to serve as a trustee for the public interest. He contrasted the special duties of government lawyers with what he called “the volatile values of politics.” That was in 1940.
Jackson understood that “lawyers must at times risk ourselves and our records to defend our legal processes from discredit, and to maintain a dispassionate, disinterested, and impartial enforcement of the law.”
“We must have the courage to face any temporary criticism,” Jackson urged, because “the moral authority of our legal process” depends on the commitment of government lawyers to act impartially.
Jackson also spoke about the role of lawyers in preserving liberty. He used a parable about three stonecutters asked to describe what they are doing. The first stonecutter focuses on how the job benefits him. He says, “I am earning a living.” The second narrowly describes his personal task: “I am cutting stone.” The third man has a very different perspective. His face lights up as he explains what the work means to others: “I am helping to build a cathedral.”
“[W]hether we are aware of it or not,” Jackson explained, lawyers “do more than earn [a] living[]; we do more than [litigate] [individual] cases. We are building the legal structure that will protect … human liberty” for centuries to come.
As my time in public service comes to an end, I encourage each of you to remember the cathedral. You are always building a legacy. You set an example for your colleagues, and you lay a foundation for your successors.
Time flies when you get to work with good and honorable people. In the words of an Eagles song: “I’d do it all again; If I could somehow; But I must be leaving soon; It’s your world now… Use well your time; Be part of something good; Leave something good behind; … It’s your world now.”
Ladies and gentlemen, this evening means a great deal to Lisa and me.
“Shot Shenorhagal-em yev Pari Keesher.” Thank you, and good night.