History, Ideology, Typology

19/12/2007

Dear compatriots,

My speech today will address three topics: first, history (in two parts); second, ideology; and third, a typology of ruling systems.

The Destruction of Armenia’s Industry

Recently, Robert Kocharyan threw the weight of his authority behind the idea, many times repeated in our society, that the former authorities destroyed Soviet Armenia’s flourishing industry. This assertion contains elements of both reality and myth. It reflects reality in the sense that the industry referred to no longer exists, just as the Kocharyan-led Stepanakert Silk Plant, or as he calls it – the “Karsholk Factory” has long been out of existence. At the same time, it is a myth or fiction, because the Soviet Union was devoid of industry that could be deemed modern in terms of supply and technological capacity.  Aside from raw materials and, to a degree, military hardware, the USSR had no industrial production that was competitive on the international market.  In that area, the Soviet Union was even far behind the communist countries of Eastern Europe. Just recall the consumer lines for Czech, Polish, Hungarian, or East German products – from clothing and shoes to beer and kitchen tiles. As for Czech crystal vases and chandeliers, Polish furniture and perfume, East German typewriters and china, these objects were dreams or miracles for the average Soviet citizen.

The Soviet economy was a closed, prison-like, or rather GULAG economy, completely isolated from the world market. As in the subsistence economy-based communities of prehistoric times, any isolated and closed system may lead to the establishment of a more or less functional economy. From my personal experience, a very instructive example of this was my prison cell in Moscow’s Matroskaya Tishina jail, where, in a short period of time, particularly thanks to a few experienced inmates, a truly extensive industry was established, which I was a participant in as well. Basic consumer goods which that super-modern industry produced for its own consumption included high-quality tobacco paper glue made of moist bread, colorful playing cards made of used cigarette boxes, amazing chess figures sculpted of bread dough, spirits made from plastic bags for the anti-septic treatment of moldy sausage, crackers dried on heating panels, eye shades made of handkerchiefs, scarves made of towels, etc. And according to my fellow inmates, the industry in the correctional labor colonies offered a still wider variety of such consumer products.        

The Soviet Union was just such a prison cell, the 250 million inmate citizens of which were to produce, consume, eat, and wear those products that were prescribed by the all-powerful GosPlan [State Planning Board]. It was that supreme authority that held the power to decide who produced what, and how much, sold to whom, and for what price. By January 1st of each year, it had already transacted the sales of the yet-to-be manufactured production for that year. At the top of the year, it was already decided where Khosrov Harutyunyan’s yet-to-be made bras would be shipped – Central Asia, or Mongolia, and where and in what quantity the future production of Leninakan’s textile factories be would consumed – in Kaluga, Nakhichevan, or Yakutsk.

Money, the ruble, was merely a conditional exchange equivalent, with the principal function to help conduct barter and do the accounting.

Armenia’s industry was part of that GULAG economy, and was indeed considered to be one of the best-developed industries in the Soviet Union. But let’s see what that industry was about in reality.  Aside from light industry and the food sector, both of which were heavily reliant on external supplies of raw material, Armenia’s economy, essentially, did not produce any finished goods. There were a few finished products in heavy industry – some machinery, electrical appliances, the Aragats refrigerator, the Yeraz minivan, etc. The production of the refrigerator, by the way, was discontinued in the early 1980s by a decision of the USSR Council of Ministers, due to an unacceptably high volume of poor quality production. As for the Yeraz minivan, it became an object of fun for peoples of the Soviet Union, along with the Armenian Radio jokes, for its exceptionally poor quality. The main segment of Armenia’s heavy industry was involved purely in parts manufacturing, meaning that we produced only separate parts, equipment, components, chiefly for the defense industry, that were further assembled into finished products elsewhere across the Soviet Union. Around 95% of Armenia’s economy was externally interdependent – more than any other republic in the Union.    

Naturally, the collapse of the Soviet Empire was going to lead to the collapse of that centralized and fundamentally interconnected industrial base.  

Under the emerging market relations, it could no longer provide for the regularity of supplies and survive free competition. It is not by coincidence that sixteen years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, no former Soviet republic has brought a single competitive product to the international market, except for raw materials.

Anywhere one looks, the only industries that are developing, to a greater or lesser extent,  involve the food, service and construction sectors, and most notably the mining industry, the ruthless growth of which may present very serious problems in the future for the healthy development of these countries’ economies. Even Russia’s defense industry, once known as one of the best in the world, functions today at the level of 30% of its capacity, and that only owing to state subsidies.

What has been said here about the Soviet Union applies equally to the former socialist bloc countries. The most vivid example in this regard is East Germany. The German Democratic Republic was industrially the most developed country of the socialist bloc, with a standard of living four times that of the Soviet Union. To help you better understand what that means, let me share with you a story from my own experience.  In 1980, my wife and I visited East Germany for one month. Whereas at that time the main concern of the average Soviet citizen was how to obtain footwear, butter, coffee, or sausage, citizens of the GDR were concerned about three different issues: how to buy a car, how far from the city to build the country house, and where to vacation in the summer – Varna or Sochi (they could not visit Western countries). Nonetheless, after the unification of Germany, the entire industry of its Eastern Lands was razed to the ground by bulldozers, so to say. In the last 18 years, over $500 billion have been invested in what was the territory of the German Democratic Republic. Yet, experts believe 50 more years will be needed before Eastern Germany catches up with the Western part of the country in terms of economic development.        

Thus, Soviet industry, too, once seemed powerful, vibrant, and self-sufficient – in the closed prison camp system, deprived of modern technology, and isolated from the world. The collapse of the system could not fail to lead to the inevitable demise of its industry, which is what more or less happened in all of the former republics of the Union. That said, the decline of the Soviet economy had started even before the demise of the empire. In 1988 to 1991, there were already very serious problems within the economic community regarding mutual compliance, supplies, and spare and assembly parts; enterprises had accumulated enormous mutual debt; the budget deficit was 400-500 billion rubles annually; the national strategic gold reserve had been totally depleted. During Prime Minister Pavlov’s term in office, savings in all Savings Bank accounts were frozen, the ruble depreciated 50 times against the value of the dollar, inflation was growing day by day, and was soon to reach enormous proportions, and so on. Those who speak about the flourishing Soviet economy inexplicably fail to recall the empty storefronts and store shelves, the mile-long lines, the coupons for rationed meat, butter, coffee, rice, grain, and tobacco-not to mention that putting mineral water, lemonade, and sour cream on the table at New Year’s Eve took quite an act of heroism.

It is finally time to understand that the Soviet Union collapsed principally because of the rapid economic decline that started in the first half of the 1980s.  No Karabakh Committee, no Baltic Popular Front, no Sakharov-led democratic movement would have succeeded in bringing the Empire down, had its economy been flourishing. To understand fully the nature of that economy, please read Yegor Gaidar’s internationally acclaimed books.  

For Armenia, the misery that had befallen all of the former republics of the Soviet Union was compounded by four additional and specific factors-the earthquake zone, 300,000 refugees, the blockades, and the war. Place any nation in that situation, and see where it ends up.  I will not focus on these much-discussed topics, but will rather be content with the following assertion: despite these additional difficulties, Armenia was the first among the members of the Commonwealth of Independent States not only to overcome economic recession by1994, but actually to start demonstrating consistent economic growth, which, as pointed out in my speech at the last rally, was also appreciated in the past by Robert Kocharyan. Given that 1994 also marked the victorious conclusion of the Artsakh War, it is hard to disagree that this was heroism unprecedented in the modern history of the Armenian people.

For those who judge occurrences from the position of a Karsholk Factory Communist party committee chair, or assistantship to Kevorkov, all this is impossible to perceive. It is this heroism that Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan are trying to take away from you, by spreading the myth about the destruction of Armenia’s flourishing industry, and trampling upon your dignity, just as they have, like nomads, trampled upon everything else that is sacred to this country.      

Wild Privatization

Privatization is always a painful process. There has not been a single large-scale or even partial redistribution of property in history that had not caused suspicion, dissatisfaction, or even unrest among segments of the society. I therefore take it calmly when I hear about the “wild privatization” carried out during my presidency, for even under the circumstances of an ideally conducted privatization, it would be impossible to avoid that kind of reaction. There will always be those who, not having received some share in the privatization results, will view the authorities with mistrust, and I’m not even talking about political speculation.

Today, I believe, is the best time to present the privatization balance sheet of both the former and current authorities.  What was, indeed, privatized by the former leadership?
–    All agricultural land, livestock, and agricultural machinery and equipment, except for 20% of the land, which was designated as national reserve intended for growing and newly created families;
–    All state-owned apartment housing, transferred free of charge to the ownership of all legally registered families in cities and towns;
–    20% of the property of all non-strategic enterprises in the Republic, assigned free of charge to the employees of these enterprises;
–    60 billion drams worth of enterprises privatized and equally distributed among the entire population, in the form of 20 thousand dram vouchers, within the first privatization program of 1994-1995;
–    Approximately 5,000 small enterprises – kiosks, stores, beauty salons, repair shops, etc.-sold to citizens on priority terms reserved for employees of these enterprises;
–    Approximately 1,250 medium and large enterprises in the food and light industry sectors (as of January 1, 1998) – around 60% of the total number, but only 40% of the total output capacity of Armenia’s medium and large-size enterprises, without touching any of the Republic’s strategic enterprises, with the exception of the HayRusGazArd (ArmRosGasProm) deal which will be discussed later.       

The land privatization or agriculture reform carried out by the former authorities merits special discussion. Armenia was the first among former Soviet republics to begin carrying out that reform as early as in 1991, still under the Soviet Empire, thereby, without exaggeration, escaping starvation. That became clear especially after the Abkhazian Railway was shut down in August 1992, leaving Armenia in a state of total blockade. The situation was such that even when Armenia purchased food supplies abroad, it was unable to import them due to the absence of transportation routes. We were able to partially overcome the blockade and ship more than 50,000 metric tones of wheat through Turkey, but it only ensured two months of supplies. In March 1993, following the taking of Kelbajar, the Turkish route was shut down as well, and we were forced to address some part of our needs at least by utilizing the possibilities offered by the port of Poti, and the nearly idle Georgian Railroad. In 1992 to 1994, the country came to almost entirely rely on our farmers, who worked hard to not only keep their own families fed more or less, but also to help feed their relatives living in the urban areas. Had the land privatization not been carried out earlier, the old-time village nomenklatura would have embezzled the entire kolkhoz and sovkhoz property (as it happened in other republics), and Armenia, in addition to experiencing the cold and darkness, would have also inevitably experienced famine. Under these circumstances, it is clear that not only would our country’s survival have been threatened, but there would have been no victory in the war, and the liberation of Artsakh would have been impossible. Therefore, we owe Armenia’s existence today, and Artsakh’s freedom, first and foremost, to the heroism of Armenia’s rural landowners, heretofore underappreciated.         

Let us now review what has been privatized under the current authorities:

–    Around 750 medium and large heavy industry enterprises, which, as mentioned earlier, represented about 60% of Armenia’s industrial output capacity. These also included almost all strategic enterprises, such as hydropower stations, the energy network, the Zangezur Copper and Molybdenum Plant, civil aviation, Armentel, the Yerevan Brandy Factory, etc.
–    Almost all mines in Armenia – whether under exploitation, or still under survey, which were sold for trifling sums mainly to the country’s high-level officials, and also partly to foreign owners.  
–    The remaining 20% of Armenia’s agricultural land, set aside as National Reserve, which was distributed among various government officials for symbolic sums.
–    All land in the urban areas, particularly Yerevan, usable for construction work, including parks and green zones.
–    Almost all structures and land categorized as state or communal property, with the exception of a few hundred administrative buildings, which have not yet been sold.
–     Forests in Armenia’s resort areas, particularly Tsakhkadzor, the Sevan Basin, Dilijan, Hankavan, and Aghveran, as well as the property and structures in the ownership of the national parks and forests authority;
–    On top of all of this, add the infamous “equity for debt” deal, under which Armenia transferred to Russia the Mars Industrial Enterprise, the Mergelian Institute and Plant, the unfinished unit of the Hrazdan Thermal Power Plant, and the Research-Industrial Enterprise for the Study of Matter, later also including on this list, for certain other reasons, the Sevan-Hrazdan cascade and the financial management rights of the Armavir Nuclear Power Plant.  A $100 million debt was not such an amount of money that an arrangement to pay it off could not have been reached with Russia. Russia is not to blame for this deal, and various complaints against Russia are absolutely inappropriate. As Russian President Vladimir Putin has stated, the initiative to make this deal came from Armenia’s authorities. They were probably driven by the desire to get rid of the interest payments on the Russian debt, and make their job easier, while at the same time they did not take into account the damage to the friendly Armenian-Russian relations that this unwise and irresponsible course of action would cause.
–    The ArmRusGasArd deal merits special consideration. Although concluded under the former authorities, it later went through certain “interesting” developments, as Kocharyan characterizes it. Under the 1997 agreement, RosGasProm obtained 45% shares of the joint venture, ITERA 10%, and the Armenian side the remaining 45%, in exchange for the value of the property of the former ArmGas. The Russian side had committed to pay for its shares by free gas supplies to Armenia for four years. The current authorities of the Republic consumed that volume in two years, after which Robert Kocharyan at a cabinet meeting angrily raised the issue of the whereabouts of some $148 million, supposedly made from the sale of gas in Armenia. That allegation implied that for two years, the free gas supplied to Armenia had been sold to the people and to business consumers, and the enormous profits from sales had been pocketed by some individuals unknown to Kocharyan. However, the question raised by the President remain just that – a question, for no one took action on it – neither the Inspector General’s Office at the Ministry of Finance, nor the Prosecutor’s Office. And it remains unclear to this day how this sad tale of $148 million ever turned out. I therefore believe it is our turn to ask: “Mr. President, where is that $148 million?” In 2006, when Armenia began accumulating new debt for RosGasProm supplies, following the rapid increase in gas prices, our authorities, motivated again by the desire to make their job easier, agreed to review the question of HayRusGazArd shares. At present, RosGasProm already possesses 57.59% shares in that venture, ITERA 7.7%, and the Armenian side 34.7%. This time around, however, Armenia’s debt continues to accumulate, and the problem will be passed on to future cabinets, and ultimately, fall on the shoulders of the people themselves.        

The greatest crime committed by the current authorities in the area of privatization is the almost complete monopolization of the economy, which has led to the near total elimination of small business in the country. The majority of entrepreneurs and business people who represent the middle class, having lost their independence a while ago, find themselves caught in the spider web of monopolist wholesale trading companies. These companies are the real proprietors of around 70% of stores, gas stations, and service sector enterprises. The government headed by Serzh Sargsyan has decided to deliver the final blow to the Republic’s middle class, by terminating, effective January 1, 2008, the Law on Simplified Taxes which applied to some 30,000 enterprises. Regardless of any economic justification, the immediate motive behind that move under the circumstances is obvious – to further increase the tax burden on enterprises belonging to the middle class, and to direct illegal revenues raised from large taxpayers to election campaign needs. But the disastrous consequences this arbitrary decision may have do not bother the government at all.      

As the examples of the industry and the state property sector demonstrate, Armenia’s current authorities have privatized twice as much property as their predecessors. That is not a crime, of course. Quite the contrary, the current authorities should be commended for taking the privatization process to its conclusion. It is the close examination of the ways in which that privatization was carried out, the extent of its compliance with the letter of the Law, the prices at which enterprises were sold, the transparency and legitimacy of auctions conducted, the share of revenues raised from privatization that entered the state budget, the role of patronage in the process of privatization, and so on that bring the crime to light.    

Not to go too far, let us recall or review through what auctions, and at what prices Armenia’s enterprises were sold, or who the present owners are of, say, the Zangezur Copper and Molybdenum Plant, the Ararat and Hrazdan Cement Factories, the Armenian aviation, ArdShinInvestBank, the Savings Bank, the electric grid of the Republic, the Blue Sevan Resort, the former VIP Hospital, the Holy Mother Hospital, the Surfing Club Hotel Complex in Sevan, almost all privatized administrative buildings in the country, the most valuable land in Yerevan, the city and inter-city bus and microbus transit lines, and so on.       

Try to recall what zodiac sign the lucky person was born under who owns, for instance, all of the following enterprises in the Artashat region: the Artashat Winery, the Mechanical Factory in the same town, the Shahumian village fleet of mechanized vehicles, the vehicles  belonging to the 5th Agro Construction Conglomerate in the same village, the Sirius Plant in Artashat, the premises of the former  town service center in Artashat, now turned into a casino, the Artashat Supermarket, the Old Bathhouse of Artashat, the hotel restaurant in the same town, the Mkhchyan Village Winery, all gas stations on the territory of the former district, the Mkhchyan Motor Park, the Mkhchyan Concrete Factory, three sand mines along the river Arax, thousands of acres of land and mines in the villages of Narek, Kaghtsrashen, Urtsadzor, Goravan, and other population centers of the Ararat Province.    

Try to get to the bottom of all of these, as well as countless similar cases, and it will become clear to you what this Kocharyan-led privatization is about, and just how civilized it is, compared to the “wild” privatization carried out by the former authorities. Interestingly, almost no privatization-related transaction carried out by the former authorities has been voided by the courts that are under the control of the current authorities. It is hard to imagine what more convincing rebuttal is needed to disprove the myth of “wild” privatization.

The Need to Reassess the Armenian Genocide

Unable to reply to arguments raised in my earlier speeches, Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan have recently discovered the most effective way to destroy me – branding me with the mortal stigma of “pro-Turkishness.” They believe they have delivered me a devastating blow, after which the people will just rip me apart, or I will never regain consciousness. To increase the delight of my former friends, I will try to fan the flames of this argument, and offer ample new evidence of my “pro-Turkishness.” Before I do that, however, I cannot fail to remind that the people who talk about “pro-Turkishness” are the same people who, throughout extended periods in their adult lives, served the [Azeri] Turks with obsequiousness.

Let me begin by saying that like many of the participants at this rally, I am a descendant of Genocide survivors. My grandfather fought in the heroic Battle of Musaler.  My seven-year old father carried food and water to the positions. And my mother was born in those days in a cave. Had the French Navy not happened to have been sailing by the shores of Musaler, I would not be alive now, and would not be speaking today from this podium, much to the delight of Robert Kocharyan and Serge Sargsyan.

Three generations of my extended family fought against the Turks, in one way or another. I already mentioned that my grandfather fought at the heroic Battle of Musaler. Earlier, in 1896, after the Zeitun uprising, he spent six months in Turkish jails. My father headed the Armenian movement against the plan to transfer the Sanjak of Alexandretta to Turkey in 1939. And I was arrested in 1966, during a demonstration commemorating the anniversary of the Genocide, and was detained for about a week in the Yerevan jail, at a time when Kocharyan and Sargsyan hadn’t even heard the word “genocide.”

I am called “pro-Turkish” because during my Presidency I on numerous occasions insisted on the necessity of improving Armenian-Turkish relations, and because I am alleged to have never raised the question of the recognition of the Armenian Genocide. The first of these assertions is accurate, for I have indeed insisted on, and continue today to believe in, the importance of the expeditious normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations; the second assertion, however, does not correspond to reality, to put it mildly. The Yerevan Genocide Museum was built during my Presidency. It was I who organized for the first time in Armenia an authoritative international conference on Genocide in 1995, attended by many world-renowned scholars. I was the only acting head of the Armenian state, from the days of the First Republic until now, to have offered a brief, yet comprehensive political assessment of the Genocide (Levon Ter-Petrossian, Select Works, Yerevan, 2006, pp. 477-481).

It is true, however, that all of this notwithstanding, I have not placed Genocide recognition at the foundation of Armenia’s foreign policy, considering it an untimely and dangerous undertaking. I will try to explain why a little later. In contrast, the second President of Armenia immediately turned that question into a cornerstone of the Republic’s foreign policy, and right from the beginning of his term, took consistent steps in that direction. What was the underlying rationale for that policy? To examine it, I must once again refer to memory. In 1997, when I suggested that Prime Minister Kocharyan head the State Council for Coordination of Armenia-Diaspora Relations, he declined, reasoning that Genocide recognition was absent from the Council’s program of action. When I, in the presence of Manushak Petrosyan, director of the Armenia Fund, asked him to explain his position, Kocharyan said literally the following: “I don’t know what genocide is, but I know for sure that the Diaspora needs it. If we include that provision, we’ll get the Diaspora excited, and it will provide greater material assistance to Armenia. Moreover, if Armenia officially puts forth the demand to recognize the Genocide, Turkey will give up, and in a year, it will open the Armenian-Turkish border. Besides, it will take a more unbiased position in the Karabakh conflict settlement, and will no longer vigorously defend Azerbaijan’s position.”      

In September 1998, Robert Kocharyan raised the issue of Genocide recognition from the UN podium, which, although hailed by court poets as an unprecedented act of courage, amounted to nothing more than a hollow and inconsequential statement. If these petty and primitive calculations were what underlay Kocharyan’s position, than it means only one thing: trampling on and desecrating our greatest national tragedy, making it an object of shameless speculation, especially considering that that none of the predictions made by the President of Armenia have materialized to this day. It is clear that those declarations at the UN on the Armenian Genocide were merely intended for domestic consumption-saber -rattling of sorts, to appear to Armenians as a hero, since no practical steps ever followed Kocharyan’s statement. Had Kocharyan and Oskanian had more serious intentions, they would have been required under a procedure outlined in the UN Charter to go through a specific process toward the recognition of the Genocide, which would result in the adoption of a corresponding resolution by that organization. As a full member of the UN, Armenia had that right, but for unknown reasons, chose not to take advantage of it, limiting itself to a simplistic simulation of raising the issue. The UN is not a press club for making statements, but an authoritative political and legal forum, where nations resolve concrete issues.    
 
Generally speaking, Armenia’s current authorities cannot tell the difference between practical policy and declarations and posturing, and forget that policy, first and foremost, is about action, not words. When they declare, “Karabakh is ours,” they believe the issue is resolved. When they insist that the Kars-Akhalkalak Railway should not be built, they believe that that’s how it shall happen. When they demand that the U.S. Congress recognize the Armenian Genocide, they are convinced that that body shall fulfill their demand. When they dictate to Turkey to open the Armenian-Turkish border, they have no doubt that our neighbor shall give in to that order. When they urge Azerbaijan to refrain from militaristic rhetoric, they think it will heed their call.

In the last ten years, Armenia’s foreign policy has come down to basically a series of such empty, provincial, and pointless declarations. The authorities aren’t bothered at all by the ridiculous position they are putting themselves and our country in. The impression is that they confuse the State with a Stepanakert Homeowners’ Association, or the Burj Hammoud Community Hall. Getting caught in the embarrassing cross-fire of their own statements, Kocharyan and Oskanian argue that they have been misunderstood, or their statements have been mistranslated. Other than in articulate bluster, who has, indeed, ever heard from them a balanced, logical analysis or a programmatic speech on foreign policy?  When did they ever present a clear position on vital and urgent foreign policy issues, such as the resolution of the Karabakh conflict, or the overcoming of Armenia’s political and economic isolation, or the normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations, or, if you will, the pursuit of Genocide recognition, the purpose of which remains unclear not only to the people, but to themselves as well.

If the current authorities were honest, they would admit that in the last ten years, our foreign policy has been one of total failure and shipwreck. They urged the U.S. Congress to maintain the Section 907 sanctions against Azerbaijan, but Congress repealed them. They officially appealed to the same body to recognize the Armenian Genocide, and we saw what happened. They urged Turkey not to condition its relations with us on the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, and open the border, but nothing came of it. Originally, they presented Turkey with the condition of recognizing the Genocide, but that condition was later withdrawn, and it was agreed that relations with that country should be normalized without pre-conditions. They urged the international community to block the construction of the Kars-Akhalkalak Railway, but that railway is now becoming a reality. They opposed the withdrawal of the Russian base from Akhalkalak, but that base no longer exists. They have boasted about Armenia’s ability to develop for yet another 100 years under blockade, but also continuously complain about the blockade. They have asserted that Armenians and Azerbaijanis, as nations, are inherently incompatible, but they also engage in around-the-clock talk of reconciliation. They claim that the Karabakh issue has been resolved as far as we are concerned, but for whatever reason, they don’t yet quit the negotiations. They attempted to block the holding of the OSCE summit in Istanbul, but in the end, they haplessly attended the summit, and moreover, signed its famous charter, officially acknowledging Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity. To sum up, a whole series of preposterous diplomatic defeats, which has been beyond the abilities of Kocharyan and Oskanian to admit or even comprehend.

Why get involved in processes that are not determined by the will of Armenia, and why aspire to roles that are beyond its capabilities? The best example of such imprudent thinking is our interference in the process of relationship-building between the European Union and Turkey. Isn’t it clear that Armenia can neither facilitate nor delay Turkey’s accession to the European Union? What business then did we have sending out letters to Brussels with demands to halt EU-Turkey negotiations or make the recognition of the Armenian Genocide a pre-condition for Turkey?

What is of greater importance to us – an inappropriately formulated principle, or Armenia’s concrete national interest? Had Europe wanted to, it would have set forth those pre-conditions, without asking us, and believe me, that’s exactly what they have done. If the European Union, under different pretexts, continues to delay negotiations with Turkey, setting forth additional conditions, it only means that Europe is not prepared yet to admit that country. When it is ready, it will accept Turkey’s explanations, putting aside whatever sharp disagreements may exist, including the issue of the Genocide.  

The behavior of Armenia’s authorities on this issue, which borders on legal incompetence, is strange in another respect as well. On one hand, they half-heartedly declare their agreement to Turkey’s accession to the EU, but on the other, as we witnessed, do everything possible to undermine it. How to explain this dual game? Isn’t it obvious that Turkey’s accession to the EU is in Armenia’s best interest in all respects – economic, political, and security? What is more dangerous – Turkey as an EU member, or Turkey that has been rejected by the West, and has turned therefore to the East? Or, what is more preferable: Armenia isolated from the West, or Armenia that shares a border with the European Union? Our country’s foreign policy should have answered these simple questions long ago. By the way, it is my impression that on the issue of Armenian-Turkish relations, Serzh Sargsyan is more serious and realistic than Robert Kocharyan, for unlike the latter, he does not suffer from the disease of narcissism.

What should Armenia’s authorities have done, rather than creating obstacles to Turkey’s accession to the EU? They should have done exactly the opposite of what they did. Namely, they should have demonstrated goodwill, and not tried to obstruct that process in any way. Moreover, they should have urged Brussels not to misuse the question of Genocide recognition, referring the resolution of that complicated problem within Armenian-Turkish relations to the parties themselves. It is time to finally understand that by presenting ultimatums to Turkey or pushing it into a corner, no one can force it to recognize the Armenian Genocide. I have absolutely no doubt that Turkey will do so-sooner or later. Yet it will happen not before the normalization of Armenian -Turkish relations, but after the establishment of an atmosphere of good-neighborliness, cooperation, and trust between our countries. Consequently, emotions aside, these relations must be built on the basis of the reality that Armenia considers the events of 1915 to be Genocide, whereas Turkey does not. The well-known offer to form a commission of Armenian and Turkish historians is unacceptable and offensive to us, first, because it casts doubt on what is for us a national conviction, and secondly, because the fact that the Genocide has been recognized by the legislatures of a number of countries makes the establishment of such a commission irrelevant and obsolete.

In no way does anything that has been here about Armenia concern the Diaspora as well. Armenia has its own understanding of, and agenda for, the normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations, and the Diaspora has its own. Armenia cannot, and has no right to, force its understanding and agenda upon the Diaspora. The sons and daughters of the Armenian Diaspora, as citizens, taxpayers, and voters of different countries, have the right to exert pressure on their governments, and demand their recognition of the Armenian Genocide. It is the internal affair of these countries whether or not to take action on their citizens’ demands. Turkey, first of all, should not confuse Armenia with the Diaspora, and secondly, it should not complain of the latter’s conduct, for the Diaspora is a consequence of the Genocide. Had they not committed Genocide, there would be no Diaspora.

We no longer have the right to repeat the fatal mistake made by the Armenian political thinkers of the late 19th and early 20th centuries,  and in the question of the Armenian-Turkish relations rely on a third force. The tragic consequences of that policy are universally known. It is not even a policy, but rather-a mindset of the pitiful, the orphan, the powerless… When you lack the strength to punish your adversary, you exult when others do so. And so we cheer when third countries make unfriendly decisions on Turkey, and rejoice when the Turkish soccer team loses. We all know this mindset from childhood. When someone hit us, and we were powerless, we rejoiced when another boy beat up the one who had beaten us. In a child, this is acceptable; for an ordinary person, its fine too; but has a statesman the right to be guided by this mindset?

Many nations and states, under differing circumstances and for different reasons, have found themselves on the verge of national catastrophe.  Armenians and Jews were subjected to Genocide. Germany and Japan, having suffered devastating defeat, were utterly destroyed. Ottoman Turkey, Britain, and Russia lost their all-powerful empires. Every nation believes in the uniqueness of its own tragedy. As Tolstoy has it, the happy are alike, but the unhappy are unhappy each in their own way. However, almost all of these nations and states, having suffered national tragedy, have turned that tragedy into a tool of healing and strength, rather than one of hopelessness and inferiority. They have found the internal strength not only to heal their wounds and rid themselves of historical complexes, but also to undergo revival and join the community of the world’s most vibrant and flourishing nations. What prevents us from following in these nations’ footsteps, instead of continuously wailing, blaming the world, and begging for justice? We cannot become a modern and viable nation until we overcome the mindset of the victim, set ourselves free of the complexes of the past, and turn our eyes to the future. The only way to overcome that mindset is to build and strengthen Armenia – a country that today is in the hands of the hyenas. History is a source of pride for many nations, but the historical burden is an unnecessary shackles.

Following this speech, there will undoubtedly be those who, with the joy of an inventor, will take my words out of context, or distort them to attribute thoughts to me that have nothing to do with the truth. I am responsible only for my own thoughts, and my own words, and it is not my intention to respond to these kinds of tricks at all. Throughout their entire history, the Armenian people have suffered mainly because of their rulers’ ignorance, short-sightedness, and adventurism. Good sense, however, has never hurt us. I trust in your good sense, and have no doubt that you will understand me correctly – even on this very sensitive subject, which certainly brings me no dividends according to the logic of the campaign trail.

The Tartar-Mongol Khanate

In my speech at the October 26 rally, I described the nature of the economic system established by the Kocharyan-Serzh regime, and noted that it has nothing to do with either socialism, or feudalism, or the nominally-declared capitalism, but instead, resembles a Tartar-Mongol khanate type system. Let me make clear: this is not an ethnic characterization, but a purely scientific concept, thoroughly researched and developed by world-renowned historians, particularly Russian Orientalists Barthold, Vladimirtsov, Grekov, and Yakubovski.

What is the nature of this Tartar-Mongol khanate? As we know, in the 13th and 14th centuries, the Mongols, under the leadership of Genghis Khan and his successors, established the largest land empire in history. At the basis of their ideology of the conquest of Heaven and Earth was the principle of “One God in Heaven and one Great Khan on Earth.”  The Mongols thus believed that their power was God-given, and that they were chosen by the Almighty to be the master of the whole world.  Other nations had to abide by their rules, and if they resisted, were subject to annihilation.   This conceptual framework left no space for not only enemy states, but also allied ones, since alliance implied equality.

The entire expanse of the Mongol Empire, with all its land and possessions, was the property of the khan and his extended family. The khan was the owner of not only the land and structures built on it, including churches and mosques, but also the entire population – men, women, and children, as well as their livestock and tools. The Great Mongol Khan or Khagan assigned the lands of the Empire to his sons and brothers, along with broad authority for inherited property and governance. However, given their lack of human and professional resources, the Mongols usually placed the burden of governing the conquered and vassal states on local kings, princes, sultans, and emirs. The khans granted them certain property and lease rights, which usually could not be inherited. To maintain their grants and privileges, these local rulers would obediently carry out the will of the Mongols – looting and defrauding their own peoples. Those who disobeyed or rebelled were immediately annihilated. Seeking the good graces of their masters, the vassal-rulers and the scholars and clerics who served them composed odes to the Mongol Khans and their officers, helping, to an extent, to ensure the vitality and security of their own peoples.    

Another characteristic of the Tartar-Mongols was that unlike the Arabs, they failed to create an ideology that would unify their vast Empire – a problem that was soon to become one of the principal causes of its untimely demise. In contrast, Islam, with its unifying mission, has been around for 1,400 years (a testament to its vitality), and remains one of the principal forces shaping world events. As for the Mongols, they were generally indifferent to or tolerant of the religions and faith systems of the nations they conquered. Originally followers of shamanism, they would become Buddhist if needed, or adopt Islam or Christianity when they found it necessary.

Now, let’s draw some parallels with our contemporary state of affairs, and see what distinguishes the Kocharyan-Serzh rule from the Tartar-Mongol Khanate. Well, there is an amazing and instructive similarity, or to put it more accurately, identicalness between the two – an extremely instructive phenomenon, indeed, for historians and political scientists. Like the Tartar-Mongol khans, Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan view Armenia as their own personal estate, and have been dividing it among their family members, close and distant relatives, in-laws, godfathers, godchildren, and the like.

Every official that loses his job in Karabakh receives an immediate appointment in Armenia. Slowly, but surely, Karabakhtsis are expanding their niche in the business life of our country, becoming a dependable base for the current authorities. This shortsighted, to put it mildly, but in fact  treacherous policy of the Kocharyan-Serzh partnership seriously endangers the survival of Karabakh by the way, by stimulating emigration and the depletion of its human resources. It has already affected our statistics, and shall one day put us on the edge of an imminent national catastrophe. This demonstrates that even the fate of Karabakh does not concern them. They have long ago moved their families, relatives, in-laws, godparents, and godchildren to Armenia. If anything happens to Karabakh, they will not even blink. It is your hearts and our hearts that will bleed, and it is we who will mourn.   
 
Let us explore further the parallels suggested above. Like the Mongols, short of necessary human and professional resources, the modern-day khans of Armenia are forced to place the burden of the country’s day-to-day operations on local officials and strongmen, awarding them with ministerial and parliamentary titles, and granting them certain property and entrepreneurial rights and privileges. The latter, much like medieval vassals, obediently carry out the orders of their masters, settling for a share of wealth made by looting and defrauding their own people. Their properties and businesses are not protected under any legal safeguards, but are fully dependent on the whims of Kocharyan and Sargsyan. If Misha Baghdasarov, Barsegh Beglaryan, Levon Sargsyan, Gagik Tsarukyan, Samvel Alexanyan, Ruben Hayrapetyan, Samvel Mayrapetyan, Hrant Vardanyan, and Harutyun Pambukyan believe they are proprietors and businessmen, they are gravely mistaken. At any moment, by the whim of the khans, they may lose both their property and their businesses. If they are told to sell their television company or bank to someone else, that’s what they will do. If a large Armtobacco shareholder is ordered to yield his shares to a third party, he will comply. If a cement factory, expropriated from its legitimate owner, is offered to another oligarch for sale, he will take it, and so on. Those who refuse to obey or to share with them, especially those who are independent-minded, shall be destroyed, as the recent harassment of Khachatur Sukiasyan and GALA TV amply demonstrate.

Our dear, respected entrepreneurs and businessmen – you, who can recite beautiful speeches from high podiums and on TV screens concerning patriotism, dignity, pride, justice, and being a lion born of a lion-how long shall you tolerate this degrading humiliation, how long shall you bear the chains of slavery? Don’t you realize that your servitude strengthens the fundament of the khan’s rule, and condemns our people, including your own children, to slavery? Don’t you see that we stand at the threshold of a fateful societal transformation, aimed at restoring the constitutional order of the land, exclusively by the peaceful, legitimate means of political activism? We shouldn’t be the ones urging you to join this new national movement. You should be leading it, and having the people follow you. What stops you from pulling together and overthrowing the yoke of the khan, so hateful to all of us-to you as well? What are you afraid of? Do you have more to lose than the people? How do you sleep at night? How do you look your wives and children in the eye? Therefore, since it is not too late, and while the people do not yet despise you altogether, straighten your backs, and join our ranks with resolve.

I understand what makes you hesitate. I understand why you are so frightened and cowering. I understand why you are surrounded by platoons of shaven-headed bodyguards. I understand it all, for the Kocharyan-Serzh regime has compromising material against you. In your business, you have been forced to overstep the law, avoid paying duties and taxes, bribe and take bribes, conceal your real revenues, time and time again. But you are not to blame. You have been forced to follow the rules of the game set by the current regime. In reality, you have fulfilled your taxpayer duties; only your payments have not ended up in the state budget, but in some other coffers. I am sure you have paid more than your due. That is the reality, and you couldn’t have done anything else, since otherwise you would have been taken to prison, or forced to give up your businesses. Even the most law-abiding foreign businessman, when they find themselves in countries like ours, must follow the rules of the game willingly or not – give bribes, avoid taxes, an so on. Although we understand all this, the question that bothers us is how long you are going to tolerate this situation and remain in the dishonorable position slavery. You were supposed to be spearheading economic development, but instead, you have turned into submissive vassals of the Tartar-Mongol khanate, and have become the main obstacle to development. Yet respect for the law shall help you regain your dignity, enjoy the respect of society, and even expand your businesses and multiply your revenues. Should you choose to continue to serve dishonorably the current authorities, they may destroy you at any moment, one by one. But if you choose to rise up as one in opposition to them, their rule will not last even a day.

Armenia’s current authorities are identical to the Tartar-Mongols in their lack of seriousness and consistency regarding ideology as well. Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan were Communists before 1990, and not just rank and file party members. Afterwards, they joined the Armenian National Movement. Kocharyan was even elected to the ANM Board, and Sargsyan was nominated, but didn’t receive the necessary number of votes. Later, Kocharyan tilted, although informally, towards the Hay Dat and the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, while Sargsyan took the helm of the Nzhdeh-nationalist party. If needed, they will become Musavatists [Azerbaijani nationalists] tomorrow morning.  

It has been noted that one of the essential attributes of the Mongol khanate is the phenomenon of praise-singers from within the conquered peoples. Hence, it is not surprising that representatives of the nomenklatura intelligentsia and the so-called responsible media, both known to be in the service of the authorities, are busy these days around the clock, writing odes to our present-day khans, much like the chroniclers and clerics of the Middle Ages. I will not focus on names, not to desecrate this blessed square-these names are known to all, in any case. Names do not even matter, for there were such poets in 1937 as well, while their colleagues Yeghishe Charents, Aksel Bakunts, Vahan Totovents, Zabel Yesayan, Mkrtich Janan, and Tadevos Avdalbekian were being shot to death in the prisons of Yerevan; and Gurgen Mahari, Vahram Alazan, Vagharshak Norents, Mkrtich Armen, Walter Aramian, Ashot Hovhannissyan, and many others were rotting in Siberian labor camps.

There were such court poets also during the Brezhnev period, when many dissidents, true patriots, human rights advocates were locked up in various prisons, labor camps, and psychiatric institutions throughout the Soviet Union. If the medieval writers and clerics had at least some justification for what they did, because they wanted to tame the cruelty of the khans and alleviate the suffering of their own people, our modern-day court poets are guided exclusively by personal interest and a penchant for honors and medals. I cannot imagine how they are going to look their students-who were detained and beaten by the police for distributing leaflets-in the eye.

As noted, the entire population of the lands conquered by the Mongols was their property. That population was forced to not only obediently carry out the will of the masters, but also to express gratitude for their mercy. The same applies to Armenia’s current authorities. Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan sincerely do not understand why the citizens of Armenia complain against, and even worse, hate them. They do not understand why the people do not appreciate their generosity and compassion. They do not understand why the people do not glorify them or pray for them day and night. Don’t these people eat, breath, bear children thanks to their good graces? Cannot they, if they want to, deny them not only bread, water, air and children, but also life? Therefore, to the chagrin of those ungrateful people, they will cling to power at any cost, and take revenge on Armenia’s ungrateful citizens. Kocharyan and Sargsyan, thus, are not only no different from the Mongol rulers, but they are also quite like their own immediate ancestors-Panah Khan and Melik Shahnazar.

A Final Word

I don’t want to leave you this evening in dismal mood following these sad observations. I am therefore going to try to cheer you up by sharing a couple of funny stories.

*  *  *
Days ago, we all watched the brave Samvel Babayan join the Kocharyan-Serzh partnership, thus completing the formation of the bandocratic Karabakh pyramid in Armenia. To earn that privilege, he has, naturally, made a down payment. The nature of that down payment is well-known: to slander, in the most sordid of ways, Armenia’s former leadership, and to the extent possible, cast aspersions against me as well. In order to help you better understand Babayan’s moral character, I must share with you here how he addressed me just three years ago: “Honored Levon Hakobi. Please accept my warmest congratulations on your 60th birthday. I value highly your lasting contribution to the establishment of Artsakh’s national liberation struggle, ensuring its comprehensive achievements, as well as the historic re-establishment and consolidation of Armenian statehood on the territories of Armenia and Artsakh. Once again, underscoring the importance of this jubilee of the first President of newly independent Armenia as a significant turning point not only in your life, but also in the political and civil life of Armenia, I wish you, from the bottom of my heart, Artsakh-style longevity, personal happiness, and continuous successes. Samvel Babayan, Lieutenant General, Hero of Artsakh, January 9, 2005” (Archive of the First President of Armenia, January 9, 2005). I think there is no need to say that whatever else the hero General says in contradiction to these words isn’t worth a penny.    

*  *  *
Recently, several media outlets have discovered yet another act of treason to accuse me of, alleging that I have been appealing to foreigners, urging them to interfere in our country’s domestic affairs. This is an excusable offense, for those who make this accusation probably do not realize, due to their lack of proper training, that the Council of Europe, its Parliamentary Assembly, and the OSCE are not some alien structures, but our own organizations. They do not realize that Armenia, as a full member of these institutions, has assumed certain obligations before them. Consequently, what we are doing is merely demanding that our own institutions monitor the implementation of these obligations. This demand stems from the obvious reality that if our state has taken upon itself commitments before these organizations, these organizations too have assumed certain commitments before our people.  All of this means that if Armenia is to view these structures as alien, then it shouldn’t have a place in any international organization.

*  *  *
Robert Kocharyan and Serge Sargsyan console themselves these days by imagining that Ter-Petrossian has no ammunition left, and has nothing new to say.  I deeply regret that I must disappoint them once again. First, the bullets I have fired so far are still flying, and even a thousand years from now, these two will not be able to wash away the label of leaders of a bandocracy. And secondly, as it clearly follows from my speech, my ammunition is as limitless as the yet undiscovered transgressions of this indivisible pair.

*  *  *
Certain journalists and even sympathetic political figures view me as the only, or the most serious, alternative to Serzh Sargsyan. If they think they are doing me an honor, they are gravely mistaken. If legitimate elections are conducted, any citizen of the Republic of Armenia can win against this prime minister who would be President. The fact is, Serzh Sargsyan has no alternative, or if he does, it is Sashik Sargsyan or Tokhmakhi Mher.

*  *  *
On Tokhmakhi, or more accurately Mher from the Gypsy district. This intellectual titan has had the misfortune of taking three missteps recently: first, he recognized himself in our anonymous reference to two of Yerevan’s infamous district mayors; secondly, he pointed the finger at, or slandered his colleague; and thirdly, he confessed to a criminal offense by admitting that in 1996 he committed serious election fraud.  Let him then have no doubt that in three months, he is going to stand trial precisely for the election fraud he committed in 1996.

*  *  *
On November 29, a notorious district police chief detained a citizen and advised him, in a “friendly” manner, to give up the idea of supporting me, threatening at the same time that if he didn’t , the man risked losing his shop. When the citizen objected, saying, “How are you going to take my shop away from me?” the policemen replied: “This country is Rob’s and Serzh’s property. How come you are trying to take it away from them?” He then added: “Serzhik will be President for ten years, and then Rob’s son will take over.” We can only marvel at the penetrating mind of this talented policeman, for having understood the nature of the Tartar-Mongol khanate established in Armenia with such staggering precision.

*  *  *
There have been reports in the media in recent days that a luxurious Airbus A-319 airplane has been purchased for the President of the Republic for $45 million. I don’t believe our country today is in a position to afford the luxury of buying a $45 million airplane. That amount would be enough to renovate at least 200 schools, or build the entire road network in Karabakh, instead of begging for $4 or 5 million from the Diaspora every year. I therefore officially declare: if I am elected President, I will arrange for the sale of that airplane, and shall put the proceeds into the state budget.    

*  *  *
In conclusion, this time my deepest gratitude goes to Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan, whose ingenious ideas and spectacular phraseology have been of great assistance to my campaign. Their every phrase and facial expression, every false smile, boundlessly strengthens your movement. So, please don’t worry, and don’t complain about them, but appreciate what feeble opponents God has granted us. They themselves are our most useful tool in the pursuit of our common objective.

Thank you for your attention and your patience. Good night.