|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|||||
|
August 10, 2005 National Citizens’ Initiative Examines Likelihood of Revolution in Armenia Yerevan—The National Citizens’ Initiative (NCI) today convened a roundtable on “The Probability of Revolution in Armenia: Preconditions and Consequences.” The meeting brought together public figures, policy makers, media representatives, analysts and experts. NCI coordinator Hovsep Khurshudian welcomed the audience with opening remarks and wished the participants fruitful work. “The final hopes that Armenia’s rulers would find strength and decency in themselves to change the destructive course which is taking the country toward the Middle Ages, and that they would initiate the first steps to the public demand for fundamental transformation seem to be thwarted. Consequently, headed by the progressive political powers, the society itself must engage in fundamental value metamorphosis, and in the outcome, Armenia would find its rightful place in the family of free, dignified and prosperous societies,” Khurshudian said.
During her policy intervention, National Press Club chairperson Narine Mkrtchian put an emphasis on the implementation of socio-political changes, and the historical necessity for the establishment of a new political system. She talked in detail about the existing preconditions in the country, which, in her view, would cause a revolution. And these are: the absence of authoritative legitimacy; the political elite’s ineptitude to form a progressive social order; corruption; clan-based rule; dilapidation of ethics at all levels; and other abuses upon which economic, intra-governmental and parliamentary crises have also accumulated; resulting in one general systemic emergency. “In countries like Armenia, the resolving of systemic crises is possible only by means of revolution,” Mkrtchian mentioned. ACNIS analyst Hovhannes Vardanian made a breakdown of the domestic and external preconditions for a rebellion. According to his observations, the revolts that have taken place in the post-Soviet region are primarily a consequence of the public’s extreme social polarization, poverty, widespread corruption, an atmosphere of arbitrariness and rights for the privileged, and other adverse phenomena. In the words of Vardanian, revolutionary developments in Armenia are being nourished by the factor that the incumbent administration is not capable, in any way, of carrying out true systemic reforms. “The current situation, which can be characterized by the inactiveness and ineffectiveness of state authorities, unbridled arbitrariness by high-level bureaucracy, advanced level of bribery and corruption, and the explicit violation of law and order, is leading the country toward anarchy and chaos, and the rule of the jungle, when the big and strong eats up the small and weak, and this makes the chance of a revolution in Armenia simply inevitable,” Vardanian said. Among external stimuli, he set forth the “snowball effect.” In his opinion, from this vantage point, the parliamentary elections to be held in Azerbaijan this fall might turn into a serious test for Armenia.
Syuzanna Barseghian, another ACNIS analyst, deemed the printed media’s role important in the formation of public opinion, and by means of a content-analysis made a distinction of the ideas the media could form when portraying the likelihood or unlikelihood of a revolution in Armenia. “When reflecting on the probability of a revolt in Armenia, on one hand, the oppositional and pro-governmental press keeps talking about choosing the ‘right time’ for a democratic revolution, and on the other hand, it refreshed the inevitability of a ‘state coup,’” Barseghian maintained, pointing out the important findings of her analysis. According to it, in May alone, 13 Armenian periodicals have printed 153 articles, or 1.04 report per one issue, on the likelihood of a revolution, and that constitutes 2.8% of the total publication space printed in the researched newspapers.
The remainder of the session was devoted to exchanges of views and policy recommendations among the public figures and policy specialists in attendance. Noteworthy were interventions by former minister of state and board member of the Heritage Party Hrach Hakobian; Edward Antinian of the Liberal Progressive Party; Noyan Tapan news agency political analyst Davit Petrosian; Moushegh Lalayan of the Republican Party; ACNIS analyst Alvard Barkhudarian; Artak Zeinalian of the Republic Party; Ruzan Khachatrian of the People’s Party; “Areg” Youth Association chairman Gerasim Barseghian; Alexander Butaev of the National Democratic Union; and many others.
|
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
