Armenia: Facing New Challenges

[Siamanto]

Online Armenian Newspaper

Yerkir

An ARF Publication

 

Armenia: Facing New Challenges

Raffi K. Hovannisian

Armenia's first Minister of Foreign Affairs, 1991-92

and the Armenian Center for National and International Studies (ACNIS)

founding director

 

Dear readers,

 

Between March 14 and 21, 2005, you had an opportunity to address your

questions on the Yerkir's website to RAFFI K. HOVANNISIAN, Armenia's

first Minister of Foreign Affairs and the Armenian Center for National

and International Studies (ACNIS) founding director. See the full

version of the interview in Armenian.

 

Thank you for your active participation: Spartak Seyranian,

editor-in-chief of "Yerkir" Weekly.

 

Hosein Tabatabaei - Dear mr. Hovhannesian. What is you opinion about

Iran - armenia relationship and cooperation ?

 

Raffi K. Hovannisian - Armenia and Iran share long-standing cultural

and civilizational traditions, which continue to this day. Iran plays

an important role in regional cooperation and security.

 

Hosein Tabatabaei - How do you think about similarities and diferences

in cultural view of piont ? shat shenoragalootion.

 

R. H. -- Real strength comes from respectful diversity.

 

Stepan - Dear Mr. Hovhannisyan, Could you comment on prospects of

Armenia as transit country, especially recent developments regarding

gas from Iran. Thank you

 

R. H. -- Armenia must strive to diversify its economic, energy, and

security strategy at home and abroad. New transit prospects flowing

from the Iran-Armenia line must be developed to safeguard Armenian and

regional energy security and the respective sovereignties of all

concerned parties.

 

Vatche Iskedjian - Mr. Hovannisian, According to you, what's the best

to tackle `corruption' in Armenia? How can we elect a parliament which

serves the people and not the oligarchs who `buy' their seats in

parliament by bribing voters?

 

R. H. -- Bribery, corruption, abuse of power, and the broader scourge

of conflicts of interest between public service and private gain have

become endemic in Armenia. It gives us no consolation that other

countries are corrupt as well. And the problem by no means resides

solely in the parliament. It is presidential, governmental, judicial,

oppositional, societal-in short, system-wide. Administratively,

Armenia continues to be a very vertical place, so the example `up top'

is crucial. If the president or a key official is corrupt, if they or

their family member or their staff pronounce beautifully on the rule

of law and a variety of anti-corruption programs but in reality abuse

their office for personal benefit, then the average citizen loses

confidence in his or her leaders and tries to beat the system as

well. A vicious circle indeed. What is needed are personal example;

political will; amendment of legislation to enable the formation of an

independent investigative and prosecutorial body that starts with the

presidency and moves down through every nook and cranny of the

administration and society; application of mechanisms for citizen

empowerment and public oversight; and finally, broad popular support

to stand together against the inevitable reactions of violence from

affected quarters both in and out of government.

 

Gevork Ter Astvadsadrian - Hello Mr. Hovannisian, I'd like to know

what Armenia's alternatives are in light of recent PACE pronouncements

, and what are possible consequences if Armenia is declared to be an

aggressor? What is the impediment to the recognition of the

independence of Atsakh, what are possible disadvantages if any, and

advantages. Thank you for your good work, and your efforts to get

recognition for Artsakh as Foreign Minister, and your commitment to

our homeland

 

R. H. -- Thank you for your kind words. I have always favored

Armenia's recognition of Artsakh's right to liberty,

self-determination, and decolonization?under international law,

domestic Soviet legislation, and historical-political

benchmarks. These legitimate advantages notwithstanding, we have not

done our utmost to design and pursue a comprehensive blueprint for

realization of its quest for freedom. Often we have sent out

conflicting signals and suffered from partisanship and parochialism

under both administrations. We need new leadership.

 

Eric - Are you going to participate in the upcoming presidential

elections in 2008?

 

R. H. -- Presidential elections are not an end unto themselves. I plan

to the best of my abilities to continue contributing to Armenia and a

dignified, democratic future for all of its citizens. Each of us must

do his or her part. For now, the best answer I can offer is that no

decision has been made nor any option ruled out. In any event, that

high office is not my raison d'etre.

 

Eric - Do not you think that with the current educational level of the

members of Armenian Government the country cannot progress with the

pace the rest of the world does? The Government consists mainly of

`strangers�=80=9D in the areas they are responsible for.

 

R. H. -- On the whole I agree, though there are happy exceptions to

the rule. We must do our utmost to keep our best and

brightest-especially ouryouth-in the country and offer them

meaningful, contemporary avenues for self-advancement and public

service.

 

M. Moradian - Do you think that Armenian government should approach

the US and the West in order to make closer ties with them or the

authorities should remain a Russian ally and base in Caucuses? Why?

 

R. H. - 21st-century Armenia should chart a course founded on its own

national interest, the absolute sovereignty of its state, the unity

and security of its nation, the democracy of its system, and the

liberty of its citizen. All else is in the derivative domain of

strategic and tactical implementation according to global and regional

developments, political consensus-building, and public confidence. A

successful, proactive policy of outreach would engage a variety of

partners on the basis of healthy competition, common causes, andshared

interests. Armenia's freedom to establish multilateral, mutually

beneficial relations, and not multilateral dependency, should

constitute the most telling index of its integral independence.

Against this background, a considered foreign policy for the Armenian

nation-state, requiring as it does the assumption of the hard lessons

that history has dealt, recognizes its sovereignty as a supreme value

to be treasured atall cost; defines maintenance of a peaceful

geopolitical environment as its vital national interest; and accepts

steady pursuit of dignified bilateral ties with all, near and far, as

the most effective modality for achieving national security. To these

ends, it behooves Armenia to cultivate a straightforward, sovereign

partnership with Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States; to

reconcile words and deeds in its attempt to integrate into European

institutions; to explore new connections in the Middle Eastern and

Asian dimensions; and to continue to bridge common domains with

neighborly Iran and transatlantic America. The world after September

11 avails Armenia of the ways and means to check and balance these

policy directions.

 

M. Moradian - If the border between Armenia and Turkey re-opens, what

would be the challenges that Armenian businessmen, farmers and people

will face?

 

R. H. - The frontier in question was closed unilaterally by the

Republic of Turkey in flagrant violation of the 1921 Treaties of

Moscow and Kars on which it so often relies-to the point that the

validity of those documents is now in deeper question than ever

before. This is Turkey's issue, though both nations stand to gain from

an open border and full normalization of relations basedon a brave

facing of history that includes acknowledgment, atonement, and

ultimate accommodation. Obviously, Armenian farmers, entrepreneurs,

and the people at large would gain in terms of access to markets and

consumer prices, but would benefit even more if Armenia found itself

in advance in a more developed state of economic

affairs. Self-confidence abroad requires first putting our own house

in order.

 

Zohrab keropian - I want to express my deep gratitude towards his

Excellency for the excellent job that he did while in office, during

that difficult times and not forgetting the raising of the Armenian

genocide issue in Constantinople Turkey. I want to ask his Excellency

on his political standings remembering the fact that during

presidential elections he supported the opposition candidate for no

clear reason thus can you give us a clear glimpse on your political

grounds?

 

R. H. - Thank you for your kind words. The political precepts that

guide me are inalienable sovereignty for our republic, security in

unity for our nation, democracy for our society, and liberty for each

and every citizen. When by application of double standards and

fear-based presidential decreesI was denied my own civil right to seek

election, I decided not to sit in a corner, instead endorsing the

distinguished candidate from the opposition. I exercised this option

because I felt that, all things considered, he was the better

candidate. What do you think, will our generation ever witness a fair,

dignified election by which authority is transferred peacefully from

incumbent to challenger? Regardless of personalities, such a

transition is imperative for Armenia's future development. It is only

with a legitimate, democratic, and rule-of-right homeland that we can

expect fulfillment of foreign-policy objectives in the region and

beyond. Stealing the vote-and thus conscience-from one's own

citizens, brutally cracking down on them, and employing violence at

every turn are domestic realities directly connected with our national

capacity to seek and attain justice for other watershed issues in the

international arena. The unjust state of our state -which has lost 1.5

million of its citizens to emigration during the years of its own

independence-relates immediately to the efficacy of our demands for

justice in the name of the 1.5 million victims of the Genocide. The

world, in essence, has become one long chain and these are its

links-apparently distant, but intertwined nonetheless.

 

Gaytzag Palandjian - Would you consider a highly necessary post, as

Minister for Diaspora-Affairs? If and when created?

 

R. H. - The position, if one of substance and not of imitation, is

worth considering at the highest levels. I believe there would be

several candidacies better than mine. Kind regards.

 

Gaytzag Palandjian - Would you not consider as imperative

invigoration/Re-organization of the Diaspora, to become a

Super-structure with Head, i.e. a Supreme Council with five

departments:-1. The Legal-Political in Strasbourg(next to RA

rep.)2. The Economic in Geneva, CH with 16-field representing chambers

of Professional Colleagues Associations. The Executive in N.Y.,next to

RA 's U.N. Rep.4. The Social Services and Repatriation in

Moscow. Spiritual at St. Etchmiadzin in constant contact with Great

House of Cilicia? Thanking you in advance, Respectfully, g.p

 

R. H. - It reads well on paper and in concept. The Armenian reality

will probably prove otherwise. Still, the aspiration is commendable

and might contribute to an informed public discourse on both

individual and structural contributions to development of a

contemporary Diaspora working professionally for its own longevity and

for the Homeland's perpetuity. Strategy should be Armenia-driven.

 

Gevork (CAN) - Mr. Hovannisian what is, from your point of view, the

best recipe or mechanism by which Armenians worldwide can optimize the

level of involvement of the Diaspora in the homeland. Is it dual

citizenship? Or maybe just time is needed for Armenians to fully

comprehend the concept of state as well as the mentalities of each

other (spyurk and hayastan)? Or maybe there is something else that we

still have not understood? Everybody agrees that Diaspora has done a

lot to help Armenia, but I think most also agree that incomparably

more may be done if the proper conditions and settings are created on

both sides.

 

R. H. - You are right. Time, mutual respect, hard work, and an

uncommon ability to look beyond the limitations of one's own vantage

point are part and parcel of the `optimization formula.' Dual

citizenship�=80'which requires that thoughtful programs be tailored

for the discharge of civic obligations by dual-national applicants and

that minimum residency thresholds be set for exercise of electoral

rights-is one important measure for ascertaining greater involvement

and inclusivity. But standing alone it is not a panacea. A grand

design, which entails a unifying cause and mutual accountability, is

in order.

 

Gevork (CAN) - Mr Hovannisian, as the director of ACNIS, how would you

assess the morale of the citizens of Armenia today (is it more or less

similar to that of citizens in other Caucasian states). If you have

information about the same issue in spyurk I would be glad to read it

as well.

 

R. H. - As you know, we are a nation that cherishes individual thought

and enterprise. One can find a multiplicity of views and dispositions

across the Homeland-Diaspora divide. Despite our trials, errors and

tribulations, there still are points of light at both ends of the

bridge. Generally speaking, however, an independent analysis would

reveal relatively low morale and overall malaise both at home and in

our communities.

 

M. D. Ajemian - Mr. Hovannisian, Has ACNIS developed any reparation

scenarios in the event that Turkey (within the context of their 10

year or so E.U. accession talks) accepts the validity of the Armenian

Genocide? And would it not be a good idea to start a national

discussion on the various possible scenarios including defining and

delimiting Western Armenia? Much of the land of Western Armenia has

been abandoned due to the Armenian Genocide and Turkishpolicy over the

last 80 years.(It should be noted that 80% of eastern Anatolia is

owned by the Turkish government) Should we not start promoting the

fact that eastern Anatoila today is not as populated as the Turkish

statistics claim,making it easier for Turkey to give up these lands

which are not essential to the existence of the Turkish State?

 

R. H. - A national discussion is always a good idea, though we have

trouble from time to time in graduating beyond our partisanship and

parochialism to achieve that level. A comprehensive framework for

examining the Genocide, its legacy, and its consequences for Armenia

and the Armenian people-both historic and contemporary-is part of this

challenge. At the same time, we must take a critical, honest look at

the state of affairs in the small parcel of the Armenian patrimony

which survives today as the Republic of Armenia. We of all people do

not need double standards. We reject them when they are applied by

Turkey, Azerbaijan, and sometimes the international community. We

certainly should not accept them in our own nation-state and among our

leaders, whether elected or not. These cannot, and shall not, be the

criteria by which we make judgments on the matters of yesterday and of

tomorrow.

 

M. D. Ajemian - Mr. Hovannisian, When I was a college student in the

late 70's and early 80's I attended many discussions on the future of

Soviet Armenia and the possibility of an independent Armenian State. I

was one of the few people who believed that the Soviet Union because

of its corrupt and economically mismanaged system would not survive

for long and that an independent Armenian State would emerge. Now most

take it for granted that Armenia is independent including those who

laughed at the idea. I for one believe that the Turkish Republic could

emerge into a different entity if all the players in Turkey's future

push hard enough to break the hold of the Kemalist elite. There are

ways to do it. It is a limited number of people who prevent Turkey

from being a European state. Should we not start making an effort to

start Turkish-Armenian conciliation with various Turkish groups in

Europe initially and as the E.U. process unfolds with groups in

Turkey?

 

R. H. - There is today an emerging Turkish voice, still in the vast

minority, seeking a brave reexamination of Turkish history, the

foundations of the modern Turkish state, and Turkish-Armenian

relations in particular. These beginnings of a crack in the official

wall of silence are gradually approaching the seminal crossroads of

the Armenian Genocide. Unbeknownst to them, this follows in the

exceptional tradition of thousands of Turkish families who in 1915, at

the risk of losing their own lives, endeavored to hide and save

individual Armenians from certain death. My grandmother owed her life

to one such righteous family of heroes, who to this day remain unsung

because of the official Turkish dialectic. Whether in Turkey or

abroad, this new generation of compelling, liberated Turkish thought

should be engaged on all levels. And, yes, potential Turkish and

Armenian accession to the European Union should become the major

causal thoroughfare for a truly European coming to terms with history,

a settlement of accounts, an inevitable normalization, and the joining

of forces for regional security and cooperation-both as neighbors and

as states member in the EU. No one should be the odd man out.

Feasibility or fantasy? The answer lies within.

 

See the full version of the interview in Armenian.

 

 

http://groong.usc.edu/news/msg107164.html