Showing posts with label HAK. Show all posts
Showing posts with label HAK. Show all posts
Monday, April 16, 2012
Monday, December 12, 2011
What did you just say?
Now, I'm not one to seek out and watch interviews with Armen Rustamyan, or any other Dashnak for that matter. Wait, that's not true, sometimes they're fun. But, honestly, I had no intention of watching the recent Armen Rustamyan interview on A1plus' PS show, as I have a million other things to do currently. But a friend told me about a specific part, knowing it would catch my attention, and she was right. See for yourselves.
At 23:59 min, in a discussion regarding March1, 2008, the PACE monitoring committee, and HAK's work, he actually has the cojones to say that hey, in reality, it was Zaruhi Postanjanyan and I who did what was necessary to get things done at PACE for March 1. He says the prisoners (I'll clarify that in a second) would have been released anyway eventually, HAK tried to take credit for it, but it would have happened anyway, what effect did HAK have? What work did HAK do? Wow.
He's becoming almost as clueless as some of my other favorite characters - Vartan Oskanyan, Seyran Ohanyan, et al... Let's take a step back from the politics of the situation -- It's not even about HAK, and how much work they did behind the scenes, or Heritage, its about the fact that tens of thousands were out in the streets, and the work they did, and the commitment they had, the sacrifices they made - and the fact that the ARF was NOT out there, was not with, or behind the people. The mast majority of the ARF is located outside of Armenia, and couldn't give a rats a** about March 1, and those who were in Armenia were toasting it up in the coalition for quite a while. Even when they were out of the coalition, they were still in it. And they're still sitting on Santa Kocharyan's lap.*
Now, I didn't really want to watch the video, as I mentioned, and I really only paid attention to the last five minutes or so. One would think, that given Rustamyan's insistence that he was an active part of the duo that did the work to get the "prisoners" released, he would at least call them political prisoners. One would think. But...
at 23:07 Rustamyan refers to the political prisoners as "prisoners"
at 23:25 the interviewer, Aram Abrahamyan, refers to those imprisoned for political reasons after March 1 as "political prisoners," in trying to clarify who Rustamyan is referring to, and Rustamyan's response? "those prisoners"
Even now, even in this context, even in trying to support his point, he is unable to refer to them as political prisoners.
Unwilling, unable, ordered not to....
I suggest the ARF go back to doing what they do well, things like, oh, off the top of my head, actively voting for Nikoyan as head of Parliament. But dont worry, no one realizes that the ARF could have (gasp) voted for the Heritage candidate, or just abstained from the vote. And don't worry, everyone believes the ARF is opposition, because only two days after actively voting to put Nikoyan, one of the characters so heavily involved in the cover-up of March 1 as head of the NA, the ARF put in a tongue in cheek vote of no confidence in government. That was really, really convincing.
*I imagine it goes something like:
--Santa Kocharyan: And what do you want this year for Xmas, oh little political party?
----ARF/BHK: Santa, I want a molybdenum mine, and my friend wants a copper mine. Oh, and can I have a factory, too? And a car dealership? And a...
--Santa Kocharyan: That's a lot, little one!
----ARF/BHK: But Saantaaa, looked at all the times I had fake fights with the HHK, and made a mockery of the system, and ignored and trodded further on the downtrodden... Please Santa? I've worked so hard to get people to be so confused and hopeless and demoralized...
--Santa Kocharyan: Okay, we'll see. One mine for now, let's see how you do until Xmas. Maybe next year if you keep up the good work... We'll see...
At 23:59 min, in a discussion regarding March1, 2008, the PACE monitoring committee, and HAK's work, he actually has the cojones to say that hey, in reality, it was Zaruhi Postanjanyan and I who did what was necessary to get things done at PACE for March 1. He says the prisoners (I'll clarify that in a second) would have been released anyway eventually, HAK tried to take credit for it, but it would have happened anyway, what effect did HAK have? What work did HAK do? Wow.
He's becoming almost as clueless as some of my other favorite characters - Vartan Oskanyan, Seyran Ohanyan, et al... Let's take a step back from the politics of the situation -- It's not even about HAK, and how much work they did behind the scenes, or Heritage, its about the fact that tens of thousands were out in the streets, and the work they did, and the commitment they had, the sacrifices they made - and the fact that the ARF was NOT out there, was not with, or behind the people. The mast majority of the ARF is located outside of Armenia, and couldn't give a rats a** about March 1, and those who were in Armenia were toasting it up in the coalition for quite a while. Even when they were out of the coalition, they were still in it. And they're still sitting on Santa Kocharyan's lap.*
Now, I didn't really want to watch the video, as I mentioned, and I really only paid attention to the last five minutes or so. One would think, that given Rustamyan's insistence that he was an active part of the duo that did the work to get the "prisoners" released, he would at least call them political prisoners. One would think. But...
at 23:07 Rustamyan refers to the political prisoners as "prisoners"
at 23:25 the interviewer, Aram Abrahamyan, refers to those imprisoned for political reasons after March 1 as "political prisoners," in trying to clarify who Rustamyan is referring to, and Rustamyan's response? "those prisoners"
Even now, even in this context, even in trying to support his point, he is unable to refer to them as political prisoners.
Unwilling, unable, ordered not to....
I suggest the ARF go back to doing what they do well, things like, oh, off the top of my head, actively voting for Nikoyan as head of Parliament. But dont worry, no one realizes that the ARF could have (gasp) voted for the Heritage candidate, or just abstained from the vote. And don't worry, everyone believes the ARF is opposition, because only two days after actively voting to put Nikoyan, one of the characters so heavily involved in the cover-up of March 1 as head of the NA, the ARF put in a tongue in cheek vote of no confidence in government. That was really, really convincing.
*I imagine it goes something like:
--Santa Kocharyan: And what do you want this year for Xmas, oh little political party?
----ARF/BHK: Santa, I want a molybdenum mine, and my friend wants a copper mine. Oh, and can I have a factory, too? And a car dealership? And a...
--Santa Kocharyan: That's a lot, little one!
----ARF/BHK: But Saantaaa, looked at all the times I had fake fights with the HHK, and made a mockery of the system, and ignored and trodded further on the downtrodden... Please Santa? I've worked so hard to get people to be so confused and hopeless and demoralized...
--Santa Kocharyan: Okay, we'll see. One mine for now, let's see how you do until Xmas. Maybe next year if you keep up the good work... We'll see...
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Monday, August 15, 2011
The Red Beret's name is Tigran Avetisyan... just look at the marks
A couple of sources today gave the story of what really happened last week when 7 youth oppositionists were beaten and taken to jail - 4 were released on parole/signature, 3 will remain in prison for at least the next 2 months. Now, the infamous Alik Sargsyan of the police, gave his own explanations, and then said, I know people will believe me. Right. Because you've been so trustworthy in the past.
Well, as it turns out, he's wrong again. He stated the whole thing started with someone and their unmuzzled dog; he also claimed the youth were drunk, and one of the police was injured/attacked by the youth and had to be taken to the hospital. Now we're getting a different story - there was no dog, the youth weren't drunk (they passed a breathalyzer test at the police station), and well... here's the story:
Artak Karapetyan noticed some Red Berets illegally searching a citizen, approached them, and asked to be a witness. The conversation was polite until Tigran Arakelyan approached. At that point, one of the Red Berets noted, "Hey, I recognize this guy, these guys are Levonakans," after which the argument started. At that time, five other HAK youth who were walking in the area approached the group, curious about all of the police and Red Berets who had gathered there.
Here is what they saw. Tigran Arakelyan was on the ground, and one of the red berets had his boot on Tigran's head, and Tigran's foot in his hand; two other Red Berets were striking him while he was down. When the other five tried to calm the situation, the Red Berets became violent towards them. The beating continued while the seven were in handcuffs. The 7 youth were put in 4 police cars, and Tigran Arakelyan and Vahagn Gevorgyan were in the same car...
Vahagn explained today what really happened in the car. The Red Beret began to choke Tigran while he was handcuffed, to the point where Tigran was half unconscious. Even the driver of the car and policeman noticed what was happening, that it was very likely that Tigran could die, and the driver pulled over - somehow the driver, the plainclothes policeman and Vahagn (to the extent that he could help while handcuffed) were able to get the Red Beret's hands off of Tigran's neck. When they started moving again, the Red Beret went again for Tigran's neck, trying to choke him, and it seemed to everyone in the car, that he was trying to to choke Tigran to death. In his struggle to move his neck out of reach and away from the Red Beret who was trying to choke him, Tigran's head hit the Red Beret's face.
That Red Beret's name is Tigran Avetisyan.
The beatings of the youth continued not only in the cars, but also at the police station.
The above is a roughly summarized translation of the azatutyun article, with a few points from the recorded bits as well.
So, where does that leave us? If, like Alik Sargsyan, someone wants to doubt this story, then the most logical place to start is the story of the choking. Because regardless of what someone does or says, there is no justification for a Red Beret stomping on someone's head, then trying to choke a (handcuffed) citizen. So, if he was choked, there should be marks on his neck, right? Well... take a look for yourselves... A video was taken of the youth when they were taken to the police station... Unfortunately, the video doesn't focuse on Tigran's neck, but I pulled some stills at different angles of his neck:
That about says it all.
Oh, again, that Red Beret's name is Tigran Avetisyan. So, whether Alik Sargsyan was 'misinformed,' or otherwise, there is a name to those choking hands.
Now, dear, dear, misinformed(?) Alik Sargsyan.... what're you gonna do about it? And what's stopping you from doing anything about it?
And why on earth are the three youth still in prison?
Well, as it turns out, he's wrong again. He stated the whole thing started with someone and their unmuzzled dog; he also claimed the youth were drunk, and one of the police was injured/attacked by the youth and had to be taken to the hospital. Now we're getting a different story - there was no dog, the youth weren't drunk (they passed a breathalyzer test at the police station), and well... here's the story:
Artak Karapetyan noticed some Red Berets illegally searching a citizen, approached them, and asked to be a witness. The conversation was polite until Tigran Arakelyan approached. At that point, one of the Red Berets noted, "Hey, I recognize this guy, these guys are Levonakans," after which the argument started. At that time, five other HAK youth who were walking in the area approached the group, curious about all of the police and Red Berets who had gathered there.
Here is what they saw. Tigran Arakelyan was on the ground, and one of the red berets had his boot on Tigran's head, and Tigran's foot in his hand; two other Red Berets were striking him while he was down. When the other five tried to calm the situation, the Red Berets became violent towards them. The beating continued while the seven were in handcuffs. The 7 youth were put in 4 police cars, and Tigran Arakelyan and Vahagn Gevorgyan were in the same car...
Vahagn explained today what really happened in the car. The Red Beret began to choke Tigran while he was handcuffed, to the point where Tigran was half unconscious. Even the driver of the car and policeman noticed what was happening, that it was very likely that Tigran could die, and the driver pulled over - somehow the driver, the plainclothes policeman and Vahagn (to the extent that he could help while handcuffed) were able to get the Red Beret's hands off of Tigran's neck. When they started moving again, the Red Beret went again for Tigran's neck, trying to choke him, and it seemed to everyone in the car, that he was trying to to choke Tigran to death. In his struggle to move his neck out of reach and away from the Red Beret who was trying to choke him, Tigran's head hit the Red Beret's face.
That Red Beret's name is Tigran Avetisyan.
The beatings of the youth continued not only in the cars, but also at the police station.
The above is a roughly summarized translation of the azatutyun article, with a few points from the recorded bits as well.
So, where does that leave us? If, like Alik Sargsyan, someone wants to doubt this story, then the most logical place to start is the story of the choking. Because regardless of what someone does or says, there is no justification for a Red Beret stomping on someone's head, then trying to choke a (handcuffed) citizen. So, if he was choked, there should be marks on his neck, right? Well... take a look for yourselves... A video was taken of the youth when they were taken to the police station... Unfortunately, the video doesn't focuse on Tigran's neck, but I pulled some stills at different angles of his neck:
That about says it all.
Oh, again, that Red Beret's name is Tigran Avetisyan. So, whether Alik Sargsyan was 'misinformed,' or otherwise, there is a name to those choking hands.
Now, dear, dear, misinformed(?) Alik Sargsyan.... what're you gonna do about it? And what's stopping you from doing anything about it?
And why on earth are the three youth still in prison?
Friday, August 12, 2011
"Our home is the struggle; we have no home other than the struggle"
"As long as the Republic of Armenia has not rid itself of the criminal regime, as long as it has not become a happy and joyous country, our home is the struggle, we have no home other than the struggle"- N. Pashinyan, on the occasion of the release of 3 of the 7 youth oppositionists - Areg Gevorgyan, Davit Kiramijyan, and Sahak Muradyan. A fourth, Vahagn Gevorgyan, was released a little while later.
It was barely over two months since the last remaining political prisoners in Armenia had been released - apparently it was too long for this regime... they had to go and get some more.
3 are being kept in detention for 2 months - Tigran Arakelyan, Artak Karapetyan, and Sargis Gevorgyan. All 7 are charged with hooliganism and assaulting officers.
And for those who still haven't seen the video evidence of the wounds inflicted on the youth by the police:
And for a great interpretation/representation of Police Chief Alik Sargsyan's response, see Teymurazyan's post on it!
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
Another set of 7 political prisoner for Armenia
1. Ընդդիմության հաջորդ հանրահավաքի օրը տրանսպորտի խափանումներ չեն լինի. Հարությունյան
(roughly translated) Harutyunyan: There will not be obstacles to transportation during the next opposition demonstration.
Oh... so you now you admit there have been... well... some obstacles... perhaps??
2.
3. Just in case you can't find it elsewhere - the 85 page document - HAK statement on the grounds for holding preterm presidential and preterm elections
Friday, July 8, 2011
Worthwhile find on Facebook...
I saw this on facebook, and with permission from the author, am reposting it here:
Moving Beyond Sticks and Stones / Գուցե, խո՞սքն է հզոր մահակից
For some time now there has been quite the raucous over the Armenian National Congress’ (ANC) willingness to engage the authorities in dialogue. While the ANC has remained steadfast in its position that any such dialogue would necessarily revolve around the issue of snap elections, this “chess game” drew the ire of more radical-minded oppositionists who consider any type of dialogue with the authorities as indicative of the ANC’s “selling out” of “the people,” or in the least, its willingness to compromise it's principles for the sake of political expedience.
At first glance, they seem to have a point. If Serge Sargsian and his “cronies” are intent on fabricating elections and perpetuating the current kleptocracy, then what’s the point of appeasing these self-appointed leaders, allowing them to further perpetuate their ongoing abuses of nation and state? Such linear thinking, however, is why we find ourselves in this bind to begin with. Political engagement does not take place in a vacuum. That the ANC and the authorities are moving closer to dialogue is not without context, and more importantly, does not contradict the ANC’s founding principles. For other political actors to claim otherwise is ill-informed at best, disingenuous at worst.
Speaking on behalf of “the people,” some seem to advocate a zero-sum strategy as the only acceptable means of communication with the ruling regime. These forces maintain that a non-cooperative, revolutionary movement is the only morally and ethically responsible choice available to the ANC. Supposedly, this is the will of “the people.” However, just who are these “people” these forces seem to be referring to? How do we know this is what “the people” want? Where are they? Where are their leaders? Why aren’t they being organized? And, if they are, why aren’t they occupying Liberty Square and demanding with resolve in their voices and raised fists an end to Sargsian’s reign, along with the corrupt and inept establishment he governs over? Or better yet, why haven’t the presidential palace or the National Assembly been stormed yet? And if this form of change is exacted, what guarantees or indicators do we have that such change, while instantaneous, would actually bring about a more immediate, stable and democratic state?
Even still, I would still be inclined to understand some of the critics if their vitriol against Ter-Petrossian and the ANC found some basis in logic. Critics have failed to present a coherent argument as to what it is exactly that the ANC stands to gain from engaging in dialogue with the authorities, other than passing references to the possibility of a couple dozen parliamentary seats at best, or a few ministries. This accusation is best addressed through the words of ANC member Gurgen Yeghiazaryan, who, in response to Republican Party member Rafik Petrosyan’s prediction that the ANC would secure 15-20 mandates in the 2012 parliamentary elections, retorted that those mandates be kept for the Republicans, themselves. Arman Grigorian of the ANC recently echoed this sentiment: “even if we were to get something, and it was just a concession to ANC, rather than a concession to society, we would be finished in a matter of days. We would become as relevant as Arthur Baghdasaryan is today.”
The fact of the matter remains that Ter-Petrossian’s return to the national stage revived Armenian society from its daze, sparking the rebirth of a civil society movement that had been dormant since the late 1990s. Moreover, the ANC remains the only organization capable of posing a real threat to both Sargsian and his ruling HHK. The ANC continues to draw a clear majority in terms of popular support; its rallies are still the most attended; its base is still the most energized; its membership is still the most diverse; and its organization still the most robust. It is one thing to challenge the ANC’s leadership and question the organization’s modus operandi; it is entirely another to accuse Ter-Petrossian and the ANC of being in bed with these authorities simply because dialogue is perceived to be an alternative preferable to violence.
__________________________________________________________________________________
Հայ Ազգային Կոնգրեսի ներկա իշխանությունների հետ երկխոսության գնալու մասին հայտարարության բարձրացրած թոհուբոհը դեռ չի դադարում: Չնայած այն փաստին, որ ՀԱԿ-ը բազմիցս հստակեցրեց, որ իր դիրքորոշումը չի փոխվել, և որ ցանկացած հնարավոր երկխոսություն տեղի է ունենալու միայն արտահերթ ընտրություններ թեմայի շուրջ, նմանատիպ «շախմատային» քայլը ցասում առաջացրեց ավելի արմատական մտածելակերպ ունեցող ընդդիմադիրների շրջանակներում, ովքեր ցանկացած շփում ներկայիս իշխանության հետ համարում են ժողովրդին «ծախելու» կամ, ավելի մեղմ, քաղաքականորեն նպատակահարմար փոխզիջումների գնալու պատրաստակամություն:
Առաջին հայացքից նրանց ցասումը ինչ-որ չափով հասկանալի է: Եթե Սերժ Սարգսյանն իր հանցախմբի հետ մտադիր է կեղծել հերթական ընտրություններն ու երկարաձգել ներկայիս բռնապետության գոյությունը, ուրեմն խաղաղ երկխոսության գնալն այս ինքնակոչ առաջնորդների հետ թվում է ինքնանպատակ քայլ` նրանց հնարավորություն ընձեռելով շարունակել իրենց անբարո վերաբերմունքն ու վարքը դեպի երկիրն ու ժողովուրդը: Սակայն, հենց նման սահմանափակ մտածելակերպն է մեզ հասցրել ներկայիս խճճված քաոսային դրությանը: Քաղաքական երկխոսությունը տեղի չի ունենում անօդ տարածության մեջ: Փաստը, որ իշխանությունն ու ՀԱԿ-ը բանակցում են հնարավոր երկխոսության թեմայով, ունի համատեքստ, որը չի դավաճանում վերջինիս սկզբունքներին: Քաղաքական գործիչներն, ովքեր պնդում են հակառակը, լավագույն դեպքում թերինֆորմացված են, վատագույն դեպքում՝ անազնիվ:
Ժողովրդի անունից որոշ գործիչներ ջատագովում են հարցի "ամեն ինչ կամ ոչինչ" մոտեցումը: Այս ուժերը վստահ են, որ անհանդուրժողական հեղափոխական շարժումը ՀԱԿ-ի ունեցած միակ բարոյական և էթիկական ուղին է: Ենթադրաբար, սա' է ժողովրդի կամքը: Սակայն, հարց է ծագում, արդյոք ու՞մ են այս ուժերը համարում «ժողովուրդ»: Ի՞նչ հիմքերի վրա են մեզ վստահեցնում, թե դա հենց ժողվորդի' կամքն է: Ու՞ր է ժողովուրդը: Որտե՞ղ են նրանց առաջնորդները: Ինչ՞ու չեն համախմբվում: Իսկ եթե կան ու համախմբված են, ապա ինչ՞ու բռունցքները վեր պարզած չեն գրավում Ազատության Հրապարակն ու անսասան վճռականությամբ պահանջում վերջ դնել Սարգսյանի սահմանազանց տիրապետությանն իր անճոռնի համակարգով հանդերձ: Կամ, ճիշտ կլինի հարցնել, արդյոք ինչու՞ դեռևս չեն գրոհել Նախագահական նստավայրը կամ Ազգային Ժողովը: Բայց բուն հարցը նրանում է, թե կա՞ն արդյոք նախանշաններ ու երաշխիք, որ վերը նշված մոտեցումը չի տա միայն ակնթարթային բավարարում, այլ կհանգեցնի կայուն ու դեմոկրատական քաղաքական հանգուցալուծման:
Ես նույնիսկ տրամադրված կլինեի հասկանալու Տեր-Պետրոսյանի ու ՀԱԿ-ի որոշ քննադատներին, եթե նրանց քննադատական մաղձը ունենար գոնե տարրական տրամաբանություն: Վերջիններս մինչ օրս ոչ մի ամբողջական ու հիմնավոր փաստարկ չեն ներկայացրել երկխոսության արդյունքում ՀԱԿ-ի շահերի վերաբերյալ, բացի ակնարկելուց հնարավոր երկու տասնյակ պառլամենտական մանդատների կամ մի քանի նախարարական աթոռների վերաբերյալ: Հանրապետական կուսակցության անդամ Ռաֆիկ Պետրոսյանի գուշակություններին, իբր թե ՀԱԿ-ը երկխոսությունների արդյունքում կապահովի 15-20-ական պառլամենտական մանդատ, ըստ արժանվույն պատասխանել է ՀԱԿ անդամ Գուրգեն Եղիազարյանը` խորհուրդ տալով հանրապետականներին մանդատները իրենց պահել: Վերջերս, ՀԱԿ անդամ Արման Գրիգորյանը նաև նշել է, որ եթե անգամ ՀԱԿ-ի մտադրությունը ոչ թե ժողովրդի, այլ հանուն սեփական շահերի փոխզիջումների գնալն էր, ապա խնդիրը վերջացած կլիներ օրերի ընթացքում և իրենք կլինեին այնքան կարևոր, որքանով այսօր քաղաքական դաշտում կարևոր է Արթուր Բաղդասարյանը:
Անհերքելի փաստն այն է, որ Տեր-Պետրոսյանի վերադարձը քաղաքական բեմ վերակենդանացրեց հայ քաղաքացուն խորը թմբիրից՝ բոցավառելով քաղաքացիական շարժում, որը նինջ էր ապրում 90-ականների վերջերից: Ավելին, ՀԱԿ-ը կար և մնում է միակ կազմակերպությունն ի զորու իրական վտանգ հանդիսանալու Սարգսյանի ու նրա հպատակ ՀՀԿ-ի համար: ՀԱԿ-ը շարունակում է ունենալ հետևորդների մեծ բանակ, ովքեր մեծամասնություն են կազմում հասարակության մեջ, հանրահավաքները ամենաբազմամարդն են, հենքը դեռ ամենախանդավառվածն է, անդամները սերում են հասարակական ամենատարբեր շերտերից, և վերջապես, անվիճելիորեն, այսօր ՀԱԿ-ն ըննդիմության ամենաամուր քաղաքական կառույցն է: Մի բան է հարցի տակ դնել ՀԱԿ-ի ռազմավարությունն ու գործունեությունը, արմատականորեն մեկ այլ բան է զրպարտել վերջինիս ու Տեր-Պետրոսյանին ներկայիս իշխանությունների հետ անկողին մտնելու մեջ` հիմնվելով լոկ այն փաստի վրա, որ երկխոսությունը գերադասվում է արյունահեղությունից:
[by Edgar Martirosyan, July 6, 2011]
Moving Beyond Sticks and Stones / Գուցե, խո՞սքն է հզոր մահակից
For some time now there has been quite the raucous over the Armenian National Congress’ (ANC) willingness to engage the authorities in dialogue. While the ANC has remained steadfast in its position that any such dialogue would necessarily revolve around the issue of snap elections, this “chess game” drew the ire of more radical-minded oppositionists who consider any type of dialogue with the authorities as indicative of the ANC’s “selling out” of “the people,” or in the least, its willingness to compromise it's principles for the sake of political expedience.
At first glance, they seem to have a point. If Serge Sargsian and his “cronies” are intent on fabricating elections and perpetuating the current kleptocracy, then what’s the point of appeasing these self-appointed leaders, allowing them to further perpetuate their ongoing abuses of nation and state? Such linear thinking, however, is why we find ourselves in this bind to begin with. Political engagement does not take place in a vacuum. That the ANC and the authorities are moving closer to dialogue is not without context, and more importantly, does not contradict the ANC’s founding principles. For other political actors to claim otherwise is ill-informed at best, disingenuous at worst.
Speaking on behalf of “the people,” some seem to advocate a zero-sum strategy as the only acceptable means of communication with the ruling regime. These forces maintain that a non-cooperative, revolutionary movement is the only morally and ethically responsible choice available to the ANC. Supposedly, this is the will of “the people.” However, just who are these “people” these forces seem to be referring to? How do we know this is what “the people” want? Where are they? Where are their leaders? Why aren’t they being organized? And, if they are, why aren’t they occupying Liberty Square and demanding with resolve in their voices and raised fists an end to Sargsian’s reign, along with the corrupt and inept establishment he governs over? Or better yet, why haven’t the presidential palace or the National Assembly been stormed yet? And if this form of change is exacted, what guarantees or indicators do we have that such change, while instantaneous, would actually bring about a more immediate, stable and democratic state?
Even still, I would still be inclined to understand some of the critics if their vitriol against Ter-Petrossian and the ANC found some basis in logic. Critics have failed to present a coherent argument as to what it is exactly that the ANC stands to gain from engaging in dialogue with the authorities, other than passing references to the possibility of a couple dozen parliamentary seats at best, or a few ministries. This accusation is best addressed through the words of ANC member Gurgen Yeghiazaryan, who, in response to Republican Party member Rafik Petrosyan’s prediction that the ANC would secure 15-20 mandates in the 2012 parliamentary elections, retorted that those mandates be kept for the Republicans, themselves. Arman Grigorian of the ANC recently echoed this sentiment: “even if we were to get something, and it was just a concession to ANC, rather than a concession to society, we would be finished in a matter of days. We would become as relevant as Arthur Baghdasaryan is today.”
The fact of the matter remains that Ter-Petrossian’s return to the national stage revived Armenian society from its daze, sparking the rebirth of a civil society movement that had been dormant since the late 1990s. Moreover, the ANC remains the only organization capable of posing a real threat to both Sargsian and his ruling HHK. The ANC continues to draw a clear majority in terms of popular support; its rallies are still the most attended; its base is still the most energized; its membership is still the most diverse; and its organization still the most robust. It is one thing to challenge the ANC’s leadership and question the organization’s modus operandi; it is entirely another to accuse Ter-Petrossian and the ANC of being in bed with these authorities simply because dialogue is perceived to be an alternative preferable to violence.
__________________________________________________________________________________
Հայ Ազգային Կոնգրեսի ներկա իշխանությունների հետ երկխոսության գնալու մասին հայտարարության բարձրացրած թոհուբոհը դեռ չի դադարում: Չնայած այն փաստին, որ ՀԱԿ-ը բազմիցս հստակեցրեց, որ իր դիրքորոշումը չի փոխվել, և որ ցանկացած հնարավոր երկխոսություն տեղի է ունենալու միայն արտահերթ ընտրություններ թեմայի շուրջ, նմանատիպ «շախմատային» քայլը ցասում առաջացրեց ավելի արմատական մտածելակերպ ունեցող ընդդիմադիրների շրջանակներում, ովքեր ցանկացած շփում ներկայիս իշխանության հետ համարում են ժողովրդին «ծախելու» կամ, ավելի մեղմ, քաղաքականորեն նպատակահարմար փոխզիջումների գնալու պատրաստակամություն:
Առաջին հայացքից նրանց ցասումը ինչ-որ չափով հասկանալի է: Եթե Սերժ Սարգսյանն իր հանցախմբի հետ մտադիր է կեղծել հերթական ընտրություններն ու երկարաձգել ներկայիս բռնապետության գոյությունը, ուրեմն խաղաղ երկխոսության գնալն այս ինքնակոչ առաջնորդների հետ թվում է ինքնանպատակ քայլ` նրանց հնարավորություն ընձեռելով շարունակել իրենց անբարո վերաբերմունքն ու վարքը դեպի երկիրն ու ժողովուրդը: Սակայն, հենց նման սահմանափակ մտածելակերպն է մեզ հասցրել ներկայիս խճճված քաոսային դրությանը: Քաղաքական երկխոսությունը տեղի չի ունենում անօդ տարածության մեջ: Փաստը, որ իշխանությունն ու ՀԱԿ-ը բանակցում են հնարավոր երկխոսության թեմայով, ունի համատեքստ, որը չի դավաճանում վերջինիս սկզբունքներին: Քաղաքական գործիչներն, ովքեր պնդում են հակառակը, լավագույն դեպքում թերինֆորմացված են, վատագույն դեպքում՝ անազնիվ:
Ժողովրդի անունից որոշ գործիչներ ջատագովում են հարցի "ամեն ինչ կամ ոչինչ" մոտեցումը: Այս ուժերը վստահ են, որ անհանդուրժողական հեղափոխական շարժումը ՀԱԿ-ի ունեցած միակ բարոյական և էթիկական ուղին է: Ենթադրաբար, սա' է ժողովրդի կամքը: Սակայն, հարց է ծագում, արդյոք ու՞մ են այս ուժերը համարում «ժողովուրդ»: Ի՞նչ հիմքերի վրա են մեզ վստահեցնում, թե դա հենց ժողվորդի' կամքն է: Ու՞ր է ժողովուրդը: Որտե՞ղ են նրանց առաջնորդները: Ինչ՞ու չեն համախմբվում: Իսկ եթե կան ու համախմբված են, ապա ինչ՞ու բռունցքները վեր պարզած չեն գրավում Ազատության Հրապարակն ու անսասան վճռականությամբ պահանջում վերջ դնել Սարգսյանի սահմանազանց տիրապետությանն իր անճոռնի համակարգով հանդերձ: Կամ, ճիշտ կլինի հարցնել, արդյոք ինչու՞ դեռևս չեն գրոհել Նախագահական նստավայրը կամ Ազգային Ժողովը: Բայց բուն հարցը նրանում է, թե կա՞ն արդյոք նախանշաններ ու երաշխիք, որ վերը նշված մոտեցումը չի տա միայն ակնթարթային բավարարում, այլ կհանգեցնի կայուն ու դեմոկրատական քաղաքական հանգուցալուծման:
Ես նույնիսկ տրամադրված կլինեի հասկանալու Տեր-Պետրոսյանի ու ՀԱԿ-ի որոշ քննադատներին, եթե նրանց քննադատական մաղձը ունենար գոնե տարրական տրամաբանություն: Վերջիններս մինչ օրս ոչ մի ամբողջական ու հիմնավոր փաստարկ չեն ներկայացրել երկխոսության արդյունքում ՀԱԿ-ի շահերի վերաբերյալ, բացի ակնարկելուց հնարավոր երկու տասնյակ պառլամենտական մանդատների կամ մի քանի նախարարական աթոռների վերաբերյալ: Հանրապետական կուսակցության անդամ Ռաֆիկ Պետրոսյանի գուշակություններին, իբր թե ՀԱԿ-ը երկխոսությունների արդյունքում կապահովի 15-20-ական պառլամենտական մանդատ, ըստ արժանվույն պատասխանել է ՀԱԿ անդամ Գուրգեն Եղիազարյանը` խորհուրդ տալով հանրապետականներին մանդատները իրենց պահել: Վերջերս, ՀԱԿ անդամ Արման Գրիգորյանը նաև նշել է, որ եթե անգամ ՀԱԿ-ի մտադրությունը ոչ թե ժողովրդի, այլ հանուն սեփական շահերի փոխզիջումների գնալն էր, ապա խնդիրը վերջացած կլիներ օրերի ընթացքում և իրենք կլինեին այնքան կարևոր, որքանով այսօր քաղաքական դաշտում կարևոր է Արթուր Բաղդասարյանը:
Անհերքելի փաստն այն է, որ Տեր-Պետրոսյանի վերադարձը քաղաքական բեմ վերակենդանացրեց հայ քաղաքացուն խորը թմբիրից՝ բոցավառելով քաղաքացիական շարժում, որը նինջ էր ապրում 90-ականների վերջերից: Ավելին, ՀԱԿ-ը կար և մնում է միակ կազմակերպությունն ի զորու իրական վտանգ հանդիսանալու Սարգսյանի ու նրա հպատակ ՀՀԿ-ի համար: ՀԱԿ-ը շարունակում է ունենալ հետևորդների մեծ բանակ, ովքեր մեծամասնություն են կազմում հասարակության մեջ, հանրահավաքները ամենաբազմամարդն են, հենքը դեռ ամենախանդավառվածն է, անդամները սերում են հասարակական ամենատարբեր շերտերից, և վերջապես, անվիճելիորեն, այսօր ՀԱԿ-ն ըննդիմության ամենաամուր քաղաքական կառույցն է: Մի բան է հարցի տակ դնել ՀԱԿ-ի ռազմավարությունն ու գործունեությունը, արմատականորեն մեկ այլ բան է զրպարտել վերջինիս ու Տեր-Պետրոսյանին ներկայիս իշխանությունների հետ անկողին մտնելու մեջ` հիմնվելով լոկ այն փաստի վրա, որ երկխոսությունը գերադասվում է արյունահեղությունից:
[by Edgar Martirosyan, July 6, 2011]
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
There you are...
Some people had been wondering where Bazaz was recently, I know I have. How could I not? But he has reared his head... Below is some information that was circulating a few days ago, and here is an article from epress (Armenian, English):
Հունիսի 25-ի երեկոյան, ժամը 21:00-ի սահմաններում Հայ Ազգային Կոնգրեսի 4 երիտասարդ ակտիվիստների հանդիպումը Երևանի փոխոստիկանապետ Ռոբերտ Մելքոնյանի և Երևանի ոստիկանության Կենտրոնի բաժնի պետի տեղակալ Արայիկ Պետրոսյանի հետ ավարտվել է Կոնգրեսի անդամներին ոստիկանության բաժին բերման ենթարկելով: Որից հետո Կենտրոնի ոստիկանապետ Սարգիս Մարտիրոսյանը և նրա աշխատասենյակում գտնվող Երևանի փոխոստիկանապետ Ռոբերտ Մելքոնյանը Երևանի ՊՊԾ գնդի հրամանատար Վալիրի Օսիպովի և Կենտրոնի փոխոստիկանապետ Արայիկ Պետրոսյանի ներկայությամբ սպառնացել են Հայ ազգային կոնգրեսի ակտիվիստներին:
[from epress] According to a new audio recording that has appeared on YouTube, what sounds to be Yerevan Deputy Police Chief Robert Melkonyan and Kentron (“Center”) Police Chief Sargis Martirosyan are heard threatening detained Armenian National Congress (HAK) activists. In the clip (available only in Armenian), the senior police officials are heard issuing a warning to the young opposition activists regarding their activities ahead of Thursday’s rally.
Recall, at about 8:45 pm on Jun. 25, four youth HAK activists — Sargis Gevorgyan, Vahagn Gevorgyan, Sargis Khachatryan and David Kiramijyan — were picked up by police from the Pushkin–Mashtots intersection while they were distributing flyers announced the Jun. 30 rally and taken to central police division. They were subsequently released at around 9:25 pm.
Here's the video that was put up on youtube:
Հունիսի 25-ի երեկոյան, ժամը 21:00-ի սահմաններում Հայ Ազգային Կոնգրեսի 4 երիտասարդ ակտիվիստների հանդիպումը Երևանի փոխոստիկանապետ Ռոբերտ Մելքոնյանի և Երևանի ոստիկանության Կենտրոնի բաժնի պետի տեղակալ Արայիկ Պետրոսյանի հետ ավարտվել է Կոնգրեսի անդամներին ոստիկանության բաժին բերման ենթարկելով: Որից հետո Կենտրոնի ոստիկանապետ Սարգիս Մարտիրոսյանը և նրա աշխատասենյակում գտնվող Երևանի փոխոստիկանապետ Ռոբերտ Մելքոնյանը Երևանի ՊՊԾ գնդի հրամանատար Վալիրի Օսիպովի և Կենտրոնի փոխոստիկանապետ Արայիկ Պետրոսյանի ներկայությամբ սպառնացել են Հայ ազգային կոնգրեսի ակտիվիստներին:
[from epress] According to a new audio recording that has appeared on YouTube, what sounds to be Yerevan Deputy Police Chief Robert Melkonyan and Kentron (“Center”) Police Chief Sargis Martirosyan are heard threatening detained Armenian National Congress (HAK) activists. In the clip (available only in Armenian), the senior police officials are heard issuing a warning to the young opposition activists regarding their activities ahead of Thursday’s rally.
Recall, at about 8:45 pm on Jun. 25, four youth HAK activists — Sargis Gevorgyan, Vahagn Gevorgyan, Sargis Khachatryan and David Kiramijyan — were picked up by police from the Pushkin–Mashtots intersection while they were distributing flyers announced the Jun. 30 rally and taken to central police division. They were subsequently released at around 9:25 pm.
Here's the video that was put up on youtube:
Sunday, May 1, 2011
What are our options?
After much pondering and talking with friends, I have yet to come to a definitive conclusion about the ongoing political issues in Armenia – most important among which are the morphing relations between the various parties. But I’ve managed to break it down in a way that makes sense to me.
I think there are three main ways to deal with the situation in Armenia – so here it goes:
1) Do nothing. The default – over time, if there are dwindling numbers at demonstrations (regardless of who holds them), if there is a feeling of loss of hope, faith, energy, whatever, this is what happens: Nothing. Things continue as they are.
2) Do everything. Outright revolution. People are tired of increasing prices, corruption, army deaths, mass emigration, oligarchs – you name it. Some critical number gathers, and then use drastic means to oust the criminal-oligarchic regime. Violence and bloodshed included. They’re gone, but then who takes over, how is that decided? Is there a new system in place that will work automatically? Are there examples in recent or historical times where revolution is followed quickly and easily by a system that works, without years of continued work/dedication for change? And, in Armenia’s case, now, do we have the manpower for revolution? Are there enough people to do that, willing to risk everything?
It’s pretty obvious that I think neither of these are an option right now. So we’re left with…
3) Something in the middle. But what is that? I suppose it’s every form of pressure to get what you want to happen except physical – financial, social, psychological, and it may include discussion. So, while option #1 is basically the lack of any goal, and option #2 just requires a goal of immediate, drastic change, option #3 requires specific goals and targets that keep in mind the ultimate goal - which for me, is regime change for the purpose of improving the wellbeing of the citizens of Armenia, and ensuring the safety and security of Armenia. Once we have those specific proximate goals, then we work towards them. And if we reject #2, then is there any other way to institute regime change than by new elections?
And that’s where we are now. The only realistic and consistent demands I’ve seen put forth are by HAK. They’ve got a set of goals, prioritized as a precondition to discourse with Sargsyan, and are already partway through the prioritized ones.
Now, this is where things get difficult. There a lot of rumors nowadays that HAK has already started to discuss deals with SS, even before the 3 goals are complete. I don’t think this is the case. I think as many have pointed out, they’re playing chess, trying to force each other’s hands. Once the 3 priorities are met, only then will true discussions start.
And why is Sargsyan interested now? Increasing internal and international pressure, for one. Ditord concisely outlined some of the similarities between SS and LTP in areas where SS could really use LTP’s help – especially with regards to NK, Turkey, and internal policies.
So what happens if SS and HAK start to talk, and demands continue to be met? Might the two- working in opposition to each other but moving forward - be able to make a serious dent in the oligarchies in place, in the corruption, in establishing stability, and solving so many of the other problems? Is it possible to even work with SS to get rid of the oligarchies when he himself is so heavily mired in them? Is there a way to have free and fair elections when this regime is still in power (if there isn’t, and there are no alternative mechanisms as I asked in #3, then we’re stuck)?
And IF the answer to these is yes, and negotiations start and progress continues, then I am left asking myself if I’m okay with that IF it means Sargsyan gets off scot free, as thinking ahead, that is one possible outcome – Sargsyan’s freedom for true change and progress in Armenia. Because my first reaction, to tell the truth, to the idea of Sargsyan getting away with everything, was one of severe nausea. But the more I think about it, the more I think, let’s keep in mind the ultimate goals, and the options ahead of us. And if our ultimate goals are for the people and Republic of Armenia, then while I really think Sargsyan deserves something drastically opposite to getting off scot free, the trade may be worth it – maybe I’m more willing to compromise for the “good” of Armenia than my initial gut reaction. And, by the way, for me that “good” includes bringing Kocharyan to justice for March 1.
In the meantime, this is what we have. None of the options or players today are perfect. But, I don’t see any other way than the steps being taken by HAK now. As disappointed as part of me was that on April 28 there wasn’t more action taken, I think it was a calculated step – Sargsyan has taken some steps, and it needed to be and was acknowledged by HAK. BHK’s statement that they will NOT be supporting HHK in the next parliamentary elections coming so soon after Sargsyan’s order to investigate March 1 was not a coincidence; Sargsyan is paying a price for his move towards HAK. At the same time, he is playing the time card. Everyone is calculating and hedging their bets. Patience is painful but necessary. I keep asking, is there another option, but I have yet to come up with one.
And hey, if some other opposition group can put forth a logical plan and put pressure on the regime and force it to meet their demands, I want to hear about it right now - the more strong, critically thinking opposition groups the better. Nobody is stopping them. But all I’ve seen from the leadership of Zharangutyun so far are “demands” that read like the wish list of an 8 year old diasporan Armenian drawing the tricolor over Massis with crayons, and more rhetoric and hypocrisy from the ARF that’s not even worth detailing.
Every time I go through it in my head, I don’t like the idea of Sargsyan finagling his way out of his guilt, and have infinite questions about how to change things. But given that options #1 and #2 are not acceptable, then pressure and even negotiations are what we have. And for right now, the steps being taken by HAK are the only option I see that will help Armenia down this difficult path.
I think there are three main ways to deal with the situation in Armenia – so here it goes:
1) Do nothing. The default – over time, if there are dwindling numbers at demonstrations (regardless of who holds them), if there is a feeling of loss of hope, faith, energy, whatever, this is what happens: Nothing. Things continue as they are.
2) Do everything. Outright revolution. People are tired of increasing prices, corruption, army deaths, mass emigration, oligarchs – you name it. Some critical number gathers, and then use drastic means to oust the criminal-oligarchic regime. Violence and bloodshed included. They’re gone, but then who takes over, how is that decided? Is there a new system in place that will work automatically? Are there examples in recent or historical times where revolution is followed quickly and easily by a system that works, without years of continued work/dedication for change? And, in Armenia’s case, now, do we have the manpower for revolution? Are there enough people to do that, willing to risk everything?
It’s pretty obvious that I think neither of these are an option right now. So we’re left with…
3) Something in the middle. But what is that? I suppose it’s every form of pressure to get what you want to happen except physical – financial, social, psychological, and it may include discussion. So, while option #1 is basically the lack of any goal, and option #2 just requires a goal of immediate, drastic change, option #3 requires specific goals and targets that keep in mind the ultimate goal - which for me, is regime change for the purpose of improving the wellbeing of the citizens of Armenia, and ensuring the safety and security of Armenia. Once we have those specific proximate goals, then we work towards them. And if we reject #2, then is there any other way to institute regime change than by new elections?
And that’s where we are now. The only realistic and consistent demands I’ve seen put forth are by HAK. They’ve got a set of goals, prioritized as a precondition to discourse with Sargsyan, and are already partway through the prioritized ones.
Now, this is where things get difficult. There a lot of rumors nowadays that HAK has already started to discuss deals with SS, even before the 3 goals are complete. I don’t think this is the case. I think as many have pointed out, they’re playing chess, trying to force each other’s hands. Once the 3 priorities are met, only then will true discussions start.
And why is Sargsyan interested now? Increasing internal and international pressure, for one. Ditord concisely outlined some of the similarities between SS and LTP in areas where SS could really use LTP’s help – especially with regards to NK, Turkey, and internal policies.
So what happens if SS and HAK start to talk, and demands continue to be met? Might the two- working in opposition to each other but moving forward - be able to make a serious dent in the oligarchies in place, in the corruption, in establishing stability, and solving so many of the other problems? Is it possible to even work with SS to get rid of the oligarchies when he himself is so heavily mired in them? Is there a way to have free and fair elections when this regime is still in power (if there isn’t, and there are no alternative mechanisms as I asked in #3, then we’re stuck)?
And IF the answer to these is yes, and negotiations start and progress continues, then I am left asking myself if I’m okay with that IF it means Sargsyan gets off scot free, as thinking ahead, that is one possible outcome – Sargsyan’s freedom for true change and progress in Armenia. Because my first reaction, to tell the truth, to the idea of Sargsyan getting away with everything, was one of severe nausea. But the more I think about it, the more I think, let’s keep in mind the ultimate goals, and the options ahead of us. And if our ultimate goals are for the people and Republic of Armenia, then while I really think Sargsyan deserves something drastically opposite to getting off scot free, the trade may be worth it – maybe I’m more willing to compromise for the “good” of Armenia than my initial gut reaction. And, by the way, for me that “good” includes bringing Kocharyan to justice for March 1.
In the meantime, this is what we have. None of the options or players today are perfect. But, I don’t see any other way than the steps being taken by HAK now. As disappointed as part of me was that on April 28 there wasn’t more action taken, I think it was a calculated step – Sargsyan has taken some steps, and it needed to be and was acknowledged by HAK. BHK’s statement that they will NOT be supporting HHK in the next parliamentary elections coming so soon after Sargsyan’s order to investigate March 1 was not a coincidence; Sargsyan is paying a price for his move towards HAK. At the same time, he is playing the time card. Everyone is calculating and hedging their bets. Patience is painful but necessary. I keep asking, is there another option, but I have yet to come up with one.
And hey, if some other opposition group can put forth a logical plan and put pressure on the regime and force it to meet their demands, I want to hear about it right now - the more strong, critically thinking opposition groups the better. Nobody is stopping them. But all I’ve seen from the leadership of Zharangutyun so far are “demands” that read like the wish list of an 8 year old diasporan Armenian drawing the tricolor over Massis with crayons, and more rhetoric and hypocrisy from the ARF that’s not even worth detailing.
Every time I go through it in my head, I don’t like the idea of Sargsyan finagling his way out of his guilt, and have infinite questions about how to change things. But given that options #1 and #2 are not acceptable, then pressure and even negotiations are what we have. And for right now, the steps being taken by HAK are the only option I see that will help Armenia down this difficult path.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Liberty Square freed, and now, a circus...
This is where we are now.
Instead of celebrating the liberation of Liberty Square, we're watching HHK mock the opposition; its painful and that's an understatement. I kept waiting to write, hoping things would calm down. But they're not calming down. And what we have is a theatre. A joke where HHK is literally sitting back and laughing at the opposition, at Heritage, at HAK, and just laughing at the arguing between them, and literally asking them to unite, just for more kicks and giggles. Whatever the cause of this drama, where reporting and focus on the true criminals of the regime is overshadowed by the obsession about a "snubbing," whatever the cause, it has to stop.
That's the short version.
I've had many thoughts other than that. I don't know if its worth it anymore to write them down, but since they keep swimming around in my head, I may as well.
First, as I noted above, we should be celebrating the re-entry into Liberty Square (and we would be if it weren't for this other drama). It is an ENORMOUS step, a great success, thanks to the hard work of many for so many years. I know some think that Raffi Hovannisyan's hunger strike there paved the way. I dont have all of the information, but I tend to think that this is not the case. A huge success, and a huge thank you, at least on my part, to those who made it happen.
This leads to a question I have had for a while, that I have discussed with numerous friends, and still have - what to do once the opposition is in Liberty Square? What to do, what to do... And after much thought and discussion, what I realized is that I think that there generally are/were two options -
1)Once Liberty Square is occupied, it becomes a stronghold for a revolution. Perhaps violent, perhaps bloody, perhaps fruitful, perhaps not.
2)once Liberty square is occupied, it becomes a symbol of success for slow change. Perhaps too slow for some. Perhaps fruitful, perhaps not. But non-violent.
Some say that nothing positive or no real change has ever come of revolutions - I've seen a lot of that on numerous sites (FB, twitter, news/blogs), especially since the massive upheaval that started with Tunisia. But I think it can be stepping stone. To think that revolution is an end in and of itself is naive, but to think that it can allow a partial tabula rasa (if you can have such a thing) from which to rethink, redesign, re-form and reform, is probably true. And while the change-over is fast, when (and if) the actual desired end-product, the desired type of government and society, is actually achieved, could be a long time off. In the meantime, there is usually a lot of violence and bloodshed.
Slow change is just that, slow, possibly painstakingly slow. Perhaps requiring political pressure, negotiations, and a number of small shifts rather than a big jump. There is no guarantee as to the end point, if it will happen, or how long it will take.
It seems to me that, despite the misrepresentations of some journals (including a recent article by the Washington Post) and some political parties, such as the ARF, LTP and HAK want the latter. Nonviolent, a velvet, soft, revolution, and if necessary, slow, as it were. In fact, if LTP wanted violence and revolution, he could have had it in 2008, and many times since. But such political behavior is not his modus operandi, he does not want to be the leader of a violent revolution. But where does that leave him, and HAK, and so much of the opposition?
Well, it seems to have gotten them this far: many (but far from all) of the political prisoners are out, Liberty Square is free. Yes, its been 3 years, but it has been bloodless, and now fruitful.
As to the Raffi Hovannisyan/Zharangutyun - LTP/HAK issue:
I have my opinions, obviously. Suffice it to say, for now, that justified or not, its sad that once again the opposition cannot cooperate. Justified or not. Any further ramblings of mine at this time add only to the ongoing circus.
And in the meantime, Pashinyan still can't get letters out. Here is a press conference given by his lawyer:
There are a number of articles in English and Armenian on numerous sites, including epress, for those interesting in more details.
The next demonstration is on April 8th. I'm sure the news media will be covering. Follow on twitter or facebook if you're so inclined.
Addendum: While I'm not going to delve into my thoughts on the RH-LTP issue for now, I can't help but add that titles such as the one given by ArmeniaNow to an article about the ongoing circus, are not only in poor taste, misrepresentations (potentially intentional), and false, but just downright poor journalism. If i tell a friend that slow and steady wins a race, referring to the Aesop's fable of the tortoise and the hare, it doesn't mean I'm telling him he should grow a shell and turn green, and predicting that he will outrun a furry rabbit. Be biased, but stick to a representation somewhere in this galaxy, please.
Instead of celebrating the liberation of Liberty Square, we're watching HHK mock the opposition; its painful and that's an understatement. I kept waiting to write, hoping things would calm down. But they're not calming down. And what we have is a theatre. A joke where HHK is literally sitting back and laughing at the opposition, at Heritage, at HAK, and just laughing at the arguing between them, and literally asking them to unite, just for more kicks and giggles. Whatever the cause of this drama, where reporting and focus on the true criminals of the regime is overshadowed by the obsession about a "snubbing," whatever the cause, it has to stop.
That's the short version.
I've had many thoughts other than that. I don't know if its worth it anymore to write them down, but since they keep swimming around in my head, I may as well.
First, as I noted above, we should be celebrating the re-entry into Liberty Square (and we would be if it weren't for this other drama). It is an ENORMOUS step, a great success, thanks to the hard work of many for so many years. I know some think that Raffi Hovannisyan's hunger strike there paved the way. I dont have all of the information, but I tend to think that this is not the case. A huge success, and a huge thank you, at least on my part, to those who made it happen.
This leads to a question I have had for a while, that I have discussed with numerous friends, and still have - what to do once the opposition is in Liberty Square? What to do, what to do... And after much thought and discussion, what I realized is that I think that there generally are/were two options -
1)Once Liberty Square is occupied, it becomes a stronghold for a revolution. Perhaps violent, perhaps bloody, perhaps fruitful, perhaps not.
2)once Liberty square is occupied, it becomes a symbol of success for slow change. Perhaps too slow for some. Perhaps fruitful, perhaps not. But non-violent.
Some say that nothing positive or no real change has ever come of revolutions - I've seen a lot of that on numerous sites (FB, twitter, news/blogs), especially since the massive upheaval that started with Tunisia. But I think it can be stepping stone. To think that revolution is an end in and of itself is naive, but to think that it can allow a partial tabula rasa (if you can have such a thing) from which to rethink, redesign, re-form and reform, is probably true. And while the change-over is fast, when (and if) the actual desired end-product, the desired type of government and society, is actually achieved, could be a long time off. In the meantime, there is usually a lot of violence and bloodshed.
Slow change is just that, slow, possibly painstakingly slow. Perhaps requiring political pressure, negotiations, and a number of small shifts rather than a big jump. There is no guarantee as to the end point, if it will happen, or how long it will take.
It seems to me that, despite the misrepresentations of some journals (including a recent article by the Washington Post) and some political parties, such as the ARF, LTP and HAK want the latter. Nonviolent, a velvet, soft, revolution, and if necessary, slow, as it were. In fact, if LTP wanted violence and revolution, he could have had it in 2008, and many times since. But such political behavior is not his modus operandi, he does not want to be the leader of a violent revolution. But where does that leave him, and HAK, and so much of the opposition?
Well, it seems to have gotten them this far: many (but far from all) of the political prisoners are out, Liberty Square is free. Yes, its been 3 years, but it has been bloodless, and now fruitful.
As to the Raffi Hovannisyan/Zharangutyun - LTP/HAK issue:
I have my opinions, obviously. Suffice it to say, for now, that justified or not, its sad that once again the opposition cannot cooperate. Justified or not. Any further ramblings of mine at this time add only to the ongoing circus.
And in the meantime, Pashinyan still can't get letters out. Here is a press conference given by his lawyer:
There are a number of articles in English and Armenian on numerous sites, including epress, for those interesting in more details.
The next demonstration is on April 8th. I'm sure the news media will be covering. Follow on twitter or facebook if you're so inclined.
Addendum: While I'm not going to delve into my thoughts on the RH-LTP issue for now, I can't help but add that titles such as the one given by ArmeniaNow to an article about the ongoing circus, are not only in poor taste, misrepresentations (potentially intentional), and false, but just downright poor journalism. If i tell a friend that slow and steady wins a race, referring to the Aesop's fable of the tortoise and the hare, it doesn't mean I'm telling him he should grow a shell and turn green, and predicting that he will outrun a furry rabbit. Be biased, but stick to a representation somewhere in this galaxy, please.
Friday, February 18, 2011
Armenian police apparently have a different flag... not the Tricolor
Two youths who were harassed while handing out flyers were interviewed today, and they pointed out something very revealing (from approx 0:50-1:10), and exactly to the point, at least in my view. Those in power, are not struggling to protect Armenia or Armenians. They are in the midst of business dealings, plain and simple.
A rough translated transcript is as follows:
HAK youth across the city were being harrassed and attacked, and two were arrested and taken in to the police station. They were released a few hours later, but it is still unclear why they were taken in in the first place.
The rally is in just a little bit on the 18th. Let's see if the police behave themselves.
A rough translated transcript is as follows:
First Youth:
“The police said something… its shameful, too... The police came up to the car and said 'put your flag away,… don’t put it here… put away your flag”
And we said “but which is your flag, then?”
Second Youth:
“It was an [Armenian] tricolor [flag] on the car.”
HAK youth across the city were being harrassed and attacked, and two were arrested and taken in to the police station. They were released a few hours later, but it is still unclear why they were taken in in the first place.
The rally is in just a little bit on the 18th. Let's see if the police behave themselves.
Friday, July 2, 2010
Davit Kiramijyan has been set free
Kiramijyan has been released!
But why?
Is it because of the upcoming visit by Hilary Clinton?
Is it because the OSCE Co-Chairs are coming?
Is it because of national and international pressure - likely in part due to including the recent letter by the HAK youth to the OSCE, the weekly protests by youth in support of Davit, and other such public and surely more behind the scenes actions?
Is it because the banditocracy does not want to give the opposition, especially the extremely visible and convincing youth, a reason to be out protesting in the streets while there are international visitors?
(Remember what happened when FIDH was in town)
Probably some combination of the above. But the fact that he was released at all, and so abruptly at that, goes to show a couple of things:
First, the regime knows what its doing its wrong.
Not only that, they know what to do to make it look not so wrong, so that can get what they want in other spheres.
And, voices matter. Every voice, every letter, every protester, every citizen - every one of these matters - and the more voices, the better...
Which is really just another way of saying...
+1 +1 +1 +1 +1...
It does leave me with a couple of other questions, though, like -
Who do we have to bring to Armenia to have Pashinyan and the other political prisoners, let out of prison?
And... Since I can't help asking - Is there anyone we could bring that could get certain culpable oligarchs and banditocrats (read Sargsyan, Kocharyan, and the rest of their gang) INTO jail?
But why?
Is it because of the upcoming visit by Hilary Clinton?
Is it because the OSCE Co-Chairs are coming?
Is it because of national and international pressure - likely in part due to including the recent letter by the HAK youth to the OSCE, the weekly protests by youth in support of Davit, and other such public and surely more behind the scenes actions?
Is it because the banditocracy does not want to give the opposition, especially the extremely visible and convincing youth, a reason to be out protesting in the streets while there are international visitors?
(Remember what happened when FIDH was in town)
Probably some combination of the above. But the fact that he was released at all, and so abruptly at that, goes to show a couple of things:
First, the regime knows what its doing its wrong.
Not only that, they know what to do to make it look not so wrong, so that can get what they want in other spheres.
And, voices matter. Every voice, every letter, every protester, every citizen - every one of these matters - and the more voices, the better...
Which is really just another way of saying...
+1 +1 +1 +1 +1...
It does leave me with a couple of other questions, though, like -
Who do we have to bring to Armenia to have Pashinyan and the other political prisoners, let out of prison?
And... Since I can't help asking - Is there anyone we could bring that could get certain culpable oligarchs and banditocrats (read Sargsyan, Kocharyan, and the rest of their gang) INTO jail?
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Soon it may be illegal to sit... at all, anywhere in Armenia
UPDATE: On May 29, Vardges Gaspari was taken into police custody (from RFE/RL, Arm. only). I have not yet seen any more information of his further detainment or release, though there were initial assurances by police that he would be released quickly.
With the completion of the underground parking lot under Liberty Square, the Square itself is now open, has been open, for a few days.
And on May 28, a small group of opposition activists, including Vardges Gaspari (known for his sit-ins) and Tigran Arakelyan (both former political prisoners), Vladimir Karapetyan of HAK and others of the HAK youth, chose to express their basic and supposedly 'protected' rights of freedom of speech, expression, and gathering.
But that is not protected in Armenia. And especially not in Liberty Square.
Just how scared must this regime be, that it seems within minutes not only police, but red berets, had swarmed around those sitting, and had starting not only arguing, but grabbing, pushing and shoving those seated and walking around. There are two videos that I've seen (a1plus and rfe/rl).
The number of police and red berets that are present is unbelievable. And the more people sit, the more the police and red berets become agitated, trying to remove them, and even trying to provoke the protesters, with grabbing, twisting and shoving. One segment shows a police officer repeatedly pushing Tigran Arakelyan, whose clearly visible hands are not even near the policeman. When they threaten to arrest Vardges Gaspari, he offers them his wrists - they clearly don't know what to do with that response, and later, he lays down, holding his protest sign to his chest. The police and red berets are unable to actually explain WHY they are trying to remove the protesters, unable to answer what law is being breached by having individuals sit on the ground, except for one time, when a red beret says "because it is an 'action' [political action or act]".
Vladimir Karapetyan points out to one of the police, that one month ago, we gathered, and there were no problems. We gathered, many people, and there was no problem. The policeman is completely confused, and says when? April 6, Karapetyan answers. Which of you [police] were here? Not a single one of you, because you were at home, with your families and children. And everything was normal, calm. Because there were no police. The response: a moment of a befuddled blank look, and then back to... You have to leave this area.... Back to playing the broken record they're ordered to... For those who don't remember, that's when FIDH was in Yerevan, and ended up joining the peaceful protest.
I watched the video, and wondered, where oh where is my Bazaz? I thought maybe he was trying to hide in the shadows, until I paid closer attention. Early in the a1plus segment, Vladimir Karapetyan gets shoved by someone, and then says "Mr. Melkonyan..." And, in fact, it is he, my Bazaz, stomping around like a rooster who has had too much coffee, ordering the removal of this person, shoving that person, yelling at this policeman, grabbing another protester... more stomping, and ordering of more backup ("Get ten people and come over"), and more stomping.
Bazaz, jan, no brown suit (that you were wearing that day), or black, or grey, or even pink, can mask your essence, can hold back your true feelings, so you may as well wear your army fatigues or police uniform. But, if you're going for a new look, may I suggest a pink silk shirt with white cuffs and collar, I hear it is all the rage in Yerevan these days.
With the completion of the underground parking lot under Liberty Square, the Square itself is now open, has been open, for a few days. And on May 28, a small group of opposition activists, including Vardges Gaspari (known for his sit-ins) and Tigran Arakelyan (both former political prisoners), Vladimir Karapetyan of HAK and others of the HAK youth, chose to express their basic and supposedly 'protected' rights of freedom of speech, expression, and gathering.
But that is not protected in Armenia. And especially not in Liberty Square.
Just how scared must this regime be, that it seems within minutes not only police, but red berets, had swarmed around those sitting, and had starting not only arguing, but grabbing, pushing and shoving those seated and walking around. There are two videos that I've seen (a1plus and rfe/rl).
The number of police and red berets that are present is unbelievable. And the more people sit, the more the police and red berets become agitated, trying to remove them, and even trying to provoke the protesters, with grabbing, twisting and shoving. One segment shows a police officer repeatedly pushing Tigran Arakelyan, whose clearly visible hands are not even near the policeman. When they threaten to arrest Vardges Gaspari, he offers them his wrists - they clearly don't know what to do with that response, and later, he lays down, holding his protest sign to his chest. The police and red berets are unable to actually explain WHY they are trying to remove the protesters, unable to answer what law is being breached by having individuals sit on the ground, except for one time, when a red beret says "because it is an 'action' [political action or act]".
Vladimir Karapetyan points out to one of the police, that one month ago, we gathered, and there were no problems. We gathered, many people, and there was no problem. The policeman is completely confused, and says when? April 6, Karapetyan answers. Which of you [police] were here? Not a single one of you, because you were at home, with your families and children. And everything was normal, calm. Because there were no police. The response: a moment of a befuddled blank look, and then back to... You have to leave this area.... Back to playing the broken record they're ordered to... For those who don't remember, that's when FIDH was in Yerevan, and ended up joining the peaceful protest.
I watched the video, and wondered, where oh where is my Bazaz? I thought maybe he was trying to hide in the shadows, until I paid closer attention. Early in the a1plus segment, Vladimir Karapetyan gets shoved by someone, and then says "Mr. Melkonyan..." And, in fact, it is he, my Bazaz, stomping around like a rooster who has had too much coffee, ordering the removal of this person, shoving that person, yelling at this policeman, grabbing another protester... more stomping, and ordering of more backup ("Get ten people and come over"), and more stomping.
Bazaz, jan, no brown suit (that you were wearing that day), or black, or grey, or even pink, can mask your essence, can hold back your true feelings, so you may as well wear your army fatigues or police uniform. But, if you're going for a new look, may I suggest a pink silk shirt with white cuffs and collar, I hear it is all the rage in Yerevan these days.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
