Paruir Hayrikyan: the problem of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia is a contempt for democracy

1344

The leader of the National Self-Determination Union, Paruir Hayrikyan talks about his formula for democratic states, conflicts and Russian influence in the South Caucasus in an exclusive interview given tonewcaucasus.com. “Our conflicts are often infringed from outside …initiators of the conflict pursue other goals – on the one hand, they talk about the peoples’ right to self-determination, on the other -they destroy people who utter this very word,” – he said. According to Hayrikyan, the region needs to get rid of foreign influence. As an example, he cites the following fact: “In Armenia, the security officer day is celebrated as a national holiday – the day of the national security of Armenia …”

– You claim that you have derived a formula by which it will be possible to raise the level of democracy in different countries …

– I have derived a formula to ensure that democracy was introduced in the figures, as often while describing a democratic situation in a country, a subjective approach is taken. When democracy is expressed arithmetically, there are only numbers to be compared. The formula was devised as a standard for measuring the level of democracy, but the same formula helps to find better forms, to reach a better level of democracy. The formula from the very beginning was based on human rights and, in particular, on the right of a citizen to be an equal participant in the democratic process. Everyone wants not just to be a participant at the election, but feel that he is an important unit of the social and political life. No votes in favor of any candidate should be left out of the process of country’s government because of imperfections in the parliamentary system. In a parliament each deputy has to vote in accordance with votes he has obtained (including the ones transferred from the losing candidates), that is, in each of the parliamentary voting as many votes as the electorate which participated in the elections should be involved. Thus, a parliamentary voting becomes more similar to a referendum on the issue put to a vote, but, unlike a referendum, in matters requiring a professional approach, not the citizens are responsible, but confined deputies. Once we gave a rough diagram of the state structure. This formula reflects upon all branches of the government – executive, legislative and judicial. By combining individual requirements of all major branches of government and summarizing them in one formula, we, first of all, have obtained a result according to which we can judge the level of democracy. Secondly, we can understand where, in what sphere and what exactly hinders the development of democracy in our country. Locke and Montesquieu were talking about power separation, not for its own sake, but so that citizens could make use of the results of the struggle between different branches of government. In order to make the citizen more secure. For some reason, politicians mostly ignore these lessons and are mostly guided by their own benefit – in way which makes the government more comfortable and easier. Therefore they introduce limitations on representativeness of the parliament and rights of citizens. The people is proclaimed the supreme source of power, but often when it is actually possible to give a direct power to the people politicians are handling through the parliament, calling it a parliamentary republic. In short, this formula aims at returning people to the real incites of the democratic state, the actual separation of powers, improvement of a democratic system in their own state. Of course, the formula is not an absolute truth, but it could become one of the standards. Regardless of whether you are using a yard or meter, you are using different standards of metric measurements. One can also pay attention to the fact that those who ignore democratic principles tend to argue that they “own democracy.” But when you consider that democracy is based on human rights, on equality of citizens, which is the supreme principle, the idea of national democracies shall not be speculated about. I am a politician myself, and I understand that politicians do not like to talk about it and I understand why. I think one of the biggest drawbacks is that it is allowed to talk to people about “own democracy.” Let’s look at specific examples: the British and Dutch systems of democracy. They differ from each other. A culture of tolerance, respect for human rights culture is at such a high level, that the sustainability of one of these democracies, particularly British one, is not clear at first. The most important thing is to understand that democracy is based on human rights and that any democratic system must first of all be able to ensure equality of all the citizens, not only on election days, but during the entire period between elections, during the entire process of democratic institutions. In two words, the formula is apt at measuring the level of democracy in a state and with its help go back to the forgotten principles found in the works of Montesquieu.

– What is the level of democracy in South Caucasian countries, as measured by your formula?

– With this formula it is very easy to measure the level in various states. I have created the formula, but I haven’t taken the liberty to measure the level of democracy. American experts have conducted their measurements, which showed that we have a deplorable situation. Georgia, until recent changes to the Constitution was, at least according to this formula, a democracy of larger scale as compared to the state of democracy in Georgia after the changes, since the executive branch used to be elected directly by the people. Today, after constitutional changes based on some unidentifiable European models, Georgia, which could have been an example for Azerbaijan and Armenia, is backwards. With regard to Armenia and Azerbaijan, democracy is not the highest value for Azerbaijani and Armenian politicians. They may occasionally rant about this, but I see that democracy in Armenia is just a meaningless word. The essence of this concept is of no interest to anyone and there is no desire to turn Armenia into a democratic state. The same thing is happening in Azerbaijan, which perfectly uses the Karabakh conflict, forced on us back in the 20s of the last century, which back then was stirred up also by Mikhail Gorbachev. By the way, conflicts are often used to justify the shortcomings of existing democratic systems.

– In Armenia parliamentary elections will take place in 2012. Will your party participate in them?

– We have not yet decided. We did not participate in the last so-called elections because it was clear beforehand that there would be no elections. A massive purchase and bribing of votes was undertaken in an open and upfront fashion. A variety of governmental agencies were used in order to introduce as many civil servants as possible in the so-called “Republican Party”. Neither I nor any of my colleagues saw any sense in participating in elections in such format.2012 is unlikely to host elections in Armenia in the true sense of the word, but we are ready to turn this process into an action. We have already applied for the elections and urged other political forces to join us. We are ready to achieve a parliamentary majority with joint forces and then pass a law on a full-fledged democracy, to amend the Constitution in order to increase the frequency of elections, and then dissolve the parliament and hold real elections. This is our program and we are ready to unite with other political forces or start a new movement on the civil level. Thus, there are two options – either to unite parties, or to start a civil movement to democratize Armenia. We consider these elections as the first step towards democratization of Armenia and as soon as constitutional changes are introduced, we will simultaneously hold a referendum on constitutional reforms and will adopt a new election law. In the new parliamentary system, not a single vote of a citizen who took part in the elections will be lost. All the votes will reach the parliament and all the votes will be taken into account at every parliamentary voting. Next elections will be held according to the new system, and if our idea will be supported, Armenia will have no head. Constitution will become the head of state; there will be executive authorities elected for a maximum of three years, an elected parliament, either by proportion or by majority, but with multiple members, not to lose any vote. The parliament will also be elected for a maximum of three years, preferably for two years. The institute of jury and constitutional judges will be restored, and the judges of the second echelon will also be elected. These changes will make Armenia a democratic state and citizens will feel themselves the masters of their country, not the tool in the hands of politicians. In this case, we will participate in the elections, otherwise it makes no sense to fight against wind mills. I understand that I have managed to make Armenia a multi-party country. Previously Armenia had communists and our party. The parties Dashnaktsutun and Republican Party were revived in Armenia on the basis of our movement, and before them – the National Self-Determination party, and even before that – The National United Party. But that time has already passed, children were born and now we have to work with them. But if children fell under the influence of the KGB, it is the biggest problem … Our political system should be free from the secret system, first of all – from the KGB.

– In your opinion, what will it give to the country?

– Many experts believe that the development of post-Soviet countries is largely connected precisely with this problem. Countries that got rid of the KGB agents, like the Baltic countries and Eastern Europe, today are in a very different political, moral and psychological condition than those that are still under the influence of the KGB agents, sometimes even in the open … As an example, I want to note that the security officer day in Armenia is celebrated as a national holiday – the day of the national security of Armenia. It is not even only shameful, but also frustrating for most of its citizens. How is it possible that Armenia, which had 94 percent of votes against Bolshevism, today celebrates the national security day!? There is coincidence, it is a policy of demoralization.

– You said once that it would be much easier to overcome the Soviet syndrome after the collapse of the USSR not individually but altogether, as did the Baltic countries. Do you think there is a prospect of unification of the South Caucasus?

– On January 12, 1988 leaders of Ukrainian, Georgian and Armenian national democratic dissident movements gathered in Armenia. Out of 9members, five were from Armenia, two from Georgia and two – from Ukraine. Three of the nine later became national heroes in their countries. This is an exceptional case in the history of mankind, when representatives of various nations of an empire gathered, made a decision and later became national heroes in their countries. Our hero became Movses Gorgisyan, in Georgia it was Merab Kostava, in Ukraine – Vyacheslav Chornovil. That is, at first, when we only started to meet, representatives of the Baltic States were yet not with us. There were meetings in Lviv, Tbilisi, and later in Vilnius we were joined by representatives of other nationalities. We began working together. At the Prague conference, we were joined by Azerbaijanis – To fig Gasimovand the chairman of the Socialist Party, Araz Alizadeh. The Prague Conference was morally patronized by Vaclav Havel. At the conference I was re-elected president of the Coordination Center. Incidentally, the Center was founded in Paris and it was founded, though it sounds immodest – by Armenians, Georgians and Ukrainians. Later we were joined by representatives of other nations. The Centre brought together all the peoples and for many it was surprising to see Armenians and Azerbaijanis together. By the way, at the Prague conference the future Azerbaijani foreign minister Tawfiq Gasimov and future president of Armenia Robert Kocharian discussed together common challenges and adopted a joint resolution. When you struggle for the independence of your people, everything is obvious and clearly defined- we are not independent, we are not subjects of international law and we want to achieve it. Now the situation is slightly complicated by the fact that you are a subject of international law, but your power is often under the direct influence of another country. In international practice, there is no practice of transferring national property to another state for a national debt. This was organized in Armenia by authorities, Russian chauvinists, businessmen, the oligarchs. This was an impossible deal! I know that the International Monetary Fund was astonished by this information. A normal government will not allow such a disgraceful move. How can a national debt be transferred in the sum of $ 100 million which is the equivalent of 10-15 debts! Especially taking in consideration the catastrophic economic situation in Armenia. The main problem in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia is the disregard for democratic principles. That’s why I have been advertising the formula in the last three or four years, hoping that we will agree on some solution, not even necessarily on the change of destruction. At first, we could become allies at the level of political parties and public organizations, as it is not even a political issue, and automatically become allies on issues regarding a huge range of problems. That is, if we have a conflict situation and we do not look at it from apolitical point of view, but only from a legal point of view, it is much easier to find a solution to the conflict. A democratic government which truly represents its people, will achieve an understanding with other peoples in a much easier way. Today when we have a conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan the South Caucasus, we cannot talk about a full cooperation in the format of the region. Nowadays those who talk about our inescapable lot to live next door to each other and live in peace are almost declared traitors. The purpose of my formula is not to minimize the tension in the conflict zones, but indirectly it would lead to its resolution. If Azerbaijan realizes that the original objective is to turn its citizens into full-fledged owners of the country, that the primary task of Armenian politicians and public figures is not to help Paruir Hayrikyan, Serge Sargsyan, or Levon Ter-Petrosyan to become masters of Armenia but to make the people masters of the country which is feasible with the help of this formula, then other questions will be easier to solve. Why is it difficult to solve common problems? Today we have no general principles, we are talking about different values, different approaches. When we have common values, when the value of an individual is above all else, we can say that we live in the same space, which is common to all. The attitudes towards conflicts will change as well. In order to overcome antagonisms, it is necessary to have common values, which are human rights. When in the 80s we started to act in open, created an official opposition party – Association of the National Self-Determination, there was a Committee on Defense of Political Prisoners in Georgia. During our meetings we discussed XII-XIII centuries, when there was no independent Armenian state, but there was a general Armenian-Georgian state, what is considered time silver age of Armenian culture and the golden age of Georgian culture. We talked about what we should strive for in order to create a federal Armenian-Georgian state. Merab Kostava and I were guided by the fact that this historical experience has already taken place it paid off. Unfortunately, my deportation to Ethiopia happened later and Kostava was killed, so we failed to develop this idea. Unfortunately, our enemies could then ignite the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, but I am very happy for the Armenian-Georgian relations, despite the fact that due to objective circumstances Georgia has often been frustrated by Armenia, I am talking about close Armenian-Russian relations; in Georgia there is no intolerance. The same thing is happening in Armenia. I am pleased that the Armenian-Georgian relations are not at the mercy of international provocateurs.

– Have you suggested the formula to other countries?

– I offered it to the Ambassador of Georgia to Armenia. He told me that it would be nice to pass the formula to the Georgian opposition in order for them to pass it in their turn to the Georgian authorities. Then I sent an e-mail with the formula to Georgian presidential staff members. By the way, some US congressmen and academia representatives have expressed their interest in the formula. The formula managed to intrigue even Iran.

– Conflicts in the South Caucasus seriously hamper the development of all our countries. In your view, is there a solution to these conflicts which will be acceptable to all parties, or are those conflicts a Gordian knot?

– The world has seen many conflicts which remained in the past. At the same time, new conflicts appear. The best way is to create a situation where conflicting countries would have the same system of values. In this case, the risk of conflicts will be minimal. Some conflicts are fueled especially for political reasons. If peoples are guided by similar values that are enshrined in constitutions, then solutions will be found easier. Although I was surprised to learn that Georgia intends to change the number of deputies, as it was announced that the referendum was held not on the whole territory of the country which is considered a ground for the invalidity of results. According to this logic, the parliament is not parliament and the president is not a president … The constitution must be sacred. External conflicts often begin because in their own country people do not treat their constitution, nor human rights with due respect. Unscrupulousness leads to lawlessness. Our conflicts are often infringed from outside, but they are infringed exactly because initiators of the conflict pursue other goals – on the one hand, they talk about the peoples’ right to self-determination, on the other – they destroy people who utter this very word. The European Union for us represents an exemplary reconciliation of contradictions. When people say, Armenians, realize that they are representatives and citizens not only of Armenia, but also of the whole world and the attitude towards the value system will change and the same will happen in Azerbaijan, Georgia, and desirably as soon as possible in Russia , then many problems which result in conflicts will automatically disappear. I did not invent anything new with my formula; I just brought to the logical end the idea of equality of citizens. We have the example, experience of the European Union and we have to adhere to the principles of equality even more than the Europeans themselves. When we talk about freedom, we must remember that we need a freedom from external pressure and external provocations. For example, when Armenians talk about the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, they remember the protection of Russia. I believe that the conflict must be resolved either under the auspices of the international community, or without any patronization at all, and surely not under the auspices of Russian, American or Turkish influences.

Irakli Chikhladze, for newcaucasus.com

Photo by newcaucasus.com

ПОДЕЛИТЬСЯ