REVANCHISM By Rouben Mirzakhanian

[MosJan]

REVANCHISM

 

http://www.azg.am/IMAGE/200116203.jpg

Rouben Mirzakhanian

The 20-th century was marked for Armenia by two key events, first it regained its independence, lost centuries ago, and second, it had to go through a severe ordeal to live in two radically different social-political and economic systems. They were realities which differed in the manner of organizing economy and in the content of human values, as well as in the conception of national ideology and the basic tasks.

 

 

During the years of the First Republic (from 1919) a one-party system was established in the country. The government was composed of members of the Armenians Revolutionary Federation (ARF, Dashnaktsutyun), which appointed the parliament and introduced the judicial system. The Bolsheviks who would come to replace the Dashnaks were doing underground work and using their entire potential were trying to oust the Dashnaks.

 

 

In 1920 after seizing the power, they outlawed the Dashnaks. Decades later any contact with the ousted party. which ruled the First Republic, was punished with all the strictness of the law. In 1921 February, several months after the Bolsheviks’ victory the Dashnak party made an attempt to seize the power back, but failed. This attempt was assessed differently by the historiography. During the Soviet times it was described as an “adventurism”, now it is qualified as a national-liberation movement, directed against the totalitarian Bolshevik state. We are not going to assess the inter-political developments in 1921, but would like to mention that it was the first attempt of revanchism.

 

 

By the way , from 1918 up to 1921 there was a death and life struggle between the Communists and Dashanks for political power, each of the sides was trying to eradicate its political rival. Acting in the Diaspora, the Dashnaks never ceased the idea of coming back to power.

 

 

Declaration of the Third Republic in 1991, which, first of all, was the result of serious geopolitical changes , brought to power an organization of quite different political quality, the Pan-Armenian National Movement (HHSh), which was formed as a result of people’s movement for fair resolution of the Karabagh problem, an organization which was straying in ideological searches even after reaching the top of power. First it was trying to get in contacts with the Socialist Internationalist, then declared its adherence to the principles of liberalism. Proceeding from this, categorical denial of the past became one of the main mottoes of the HHHh. The Communist party of Armenia, which already lost its independence under the Soviets, was not able to start a campaign of revanchism under the conditions of national revival.

 

 

In 1991 in Moscow an attempt was made by revanchists to keep the power. The Armenian political elite, including senior Communist members, were silently following the developments in Moscow. The failure of Moscow revanchists was the beginning of a short period of time when the Communists in Russia were declared out of law. Several years later, however, the Armenian Communists became stronger and as a result of the economic policy of the HHSh the Communist party of Armenia not only won seats in the parliament but also declared openly about its revanchist aspirations, coming out against the sovereignty of the Armenian state and advocating for the restoration of the collapsed USSR.

 

 

Passage of the power from the Dashnaks to Bolsheviks and from them to the HHSh is the outward side of the changes, that took place in the life of our people. What actually occurred was a radical change in all the areas of life, and aspiration to restore the lost power, revanchism, has become the main objective of the aforementioned forces.

 

 

The present

The change of power in 1998 was not followed by the change of the political system. The turmoil in the inner-political situation as a result of the change of power, as well as October 27 crime in the Armenian parliament were surpassed thanks to the acting Constitution, adopted in 1995, but the existence of several forces striving to restore the lost power is evident. These parties are trying to present themselves to the public as the political opposition. But in reality none of them can be qualified as “classical opposition: none of them demonstrates ideological differences with the acting power, they not only cooperated with the current authorities in different years, but also formed the ruling system, but have assumed an opposition stance only after losing the power. The first group of these people is the closest surrounding of the ex-president Levon Ter-Petrosian, which from 1990 up to 1998 were governing the country. Having at their disposition certain material and informational resources and continuing contacts with individual financial tycoons in the Diaspora, representatives of this group understand that the majority of the people reject them.

 

 

Some other revanchist groupings avoid open and public cooperation with the representatives of former administration of Ter-Petrosian. The dominant objective of these people is ousting the current president and to bring to power another revanchist group with the aim of integrating in it for a certain period of time and then restore the lost power.

 

 

To reach this goal this group is ready to collaborate with anyone. Being a grouping with no clearly cut ideology when in power, especially in the recent years, and rejecting the national ideology, some members of this group entered the so-called Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC), a Commission, the main goal of which was described by former deputy foreign minister of Turkey Ozdem Sanbark as “ prevention of initiatives seeking international recognition of the Armenian Genocide, which may weaken Turkey’s positions.”

 

 

“It is important for us that this question should not be considered in the US Congress,” Sanbark said. “As long as we continue the dialogue, I am sure, the issue will not be put on the Congress agenda and we ,Turks, will only benefit from it.”

 

 

When needed , these groupings assume a pro-Russian position, under other circumstances they become pro-Western. They come out with social-democratic mottoes, but assure they are proponents of liberal ideology.

 

 

In 1999 parliamentary elections the legislative and the executive power were chiefly formed by Karen Demirchian and Vazgen Sargisian. As a result of October 27 crime in the parliament, a certain portion of the political layer, that was closely connected with these political figures, has lost power levers. Their families were deprived of economic privileges and lost the power to influence the inner-political development. The second group striving to restore the lost power was formed. Part of it, having inherited rather serious material resources and having direct links with the top military officials and representatives of the executive power has as their dominant goal ousting the acting president.

 

 

The third group of revanchists is represented by individuals who held senior positions in late 80s and early 90s and who kept their positions, after the HHSh came to power, but in the course of the years they have not put up with the idea of becoming outsiders of the real power. Representatives of this direction have no direct links with each other. Narcissism, exaggeration of their mental and organizing capabilities which creates an illusion that they are popular among the people are the main characteristics of this group. They think that admiration they receive from part of the people who are in heavy social conditions and by certain group of people who connect their promotion with them may, become a crucial factor in future political developments. Representatives of this group in general welcomed change of power in 1998, but having not received top positions, that is failing to reach their revanchist goals, have turned into most noisy “opposition.’

 

 

Can these groups, different with respect to their genealogy, way of thinking, which even were rivals at different period of time, unite? Yes! The core of their objectives is apparent-ousting of the acting president.

 

 

Can they reach their goal by joint efforts? No! The modern political history says: the opposition will be able to reach its goal, but revanchists never.

 

 

Future

Existence of opposition is a compulsory component of any developed political system. Political opposition is the bearer of a certain ideology. Its task is to implement the goals, based on the aforementioned ideology. Revanchism has only one goal-to restore the lost power. Revanchism is based on hatred, which, as a rule is individualized.

 

 

The notion of revanchism is derived from French “revanch”, which means “to take revenge” A political movement based on revenge has no prospects and is doomed to bankruptcy. Revanchists cannot accept new ideas and they lack creativity. Their main goal is to take revenge on those who have “occupied” their place. Revanchism is dangerous. To reach their goals these people will do everything. They are ready not only to constantly deceive the people, but also to sell themselves out to anyone who will help them to satisfy their feeling of revenge. Any stranger, and even enemy may be this “anyone.”

 

 

Political alliances, based on revanchist ideas are existent in the countries with developed political system as well, but there they do not form any quality because of the political opposition, which, as a rule strives to go back to power, if it had it, but using radically different methods, and what is more important, the opposition’s goals are very different from those of the revanchists. Political opposition strives for power to make social and economic conditions better and to avoid the mistakes of the past. Revanchists strive for power to take revenge and restore what they had when in power.

 

 

What kind of situation there should be to allow the political opposition to become a factor promoting progress of the country and to eliminate conditions of revanchism? First of all, we need a political system with 4-5 parties, carriers of most important ideologies and formed not on clan principles or personal devotion. We need a political system formed on the outcome of elections in which the force structures do not occupy privileged positions and are depoliticized. We need an economic system which will reject monopolies and which will be operating on the principles of free competition. It is evident that implementation of all these aforementioned tasks in a short period of time in a post-Soviet country which suffered from economic and political turmoil is very difficult. But we had to strengthen progress tendencies.

 

 

We believe that the process of formation of local self-management bodies in 2002 elections and then in the legislator will be a serious step towards establishment of power and formation of a civilized opposition. There is a mere chance for it and nothing more…