“We appeared at the bottom”

28/01/2012 Marineh MARTIROSYAN

– In 2012 June Armenia is going to participate in the ecological conference Rio-20. It is interesting to know what Armenia is going to present if during the past several years Armenia has encountered a serious ecological disaster. On the one hand we have the ghost of Teghut mine and on the other hand the governmental projects, which will mildly-said cause the elimination of Kajaran, Jermuk, Lernadzor. In that case, why are we participating? What do we have to show to the world?

– Our country’s participation in this conference is mandatory because it is the UN summit, where all the countries participate. It doesn’t only relate to the exploitation of the resources. The conference relates to sustainable development, the components of which are abundant, including educational, social, etc. I think our country should participate in that conference by trying to learn from the practice of others.

– Who should represent our country? Is that the Ministry of Nature Protection?

– Usually national delegations participate in the UN summits, which are mainly led by either the Presidents of countries or Prime Ministers, including foreign affairs ministers, CSOs.

– How can we understand the ecological trend of the conference?

– As early as in 1972 the UN appeal for countries gathered in Stockholm to discuss the issue of priority, that civilization has entered the ecological crisis, then set up a special committee, which included experts from different countries, studying the Earth situation. The Commission entered an ecological crisis in the country’s conclusion, which we did not observe in the scientific field. Therefore, there is a problem here as well as science and the answer was that science is differentiated, which is due to the global problems. So now we have the issue of integration of knowledge in the science and education fields. On the other hand we have the responsibility factor of the developed states, which threaten 60-80% of the planet. Later we had the need for the development of the new charter, the goal of which was changing the material civilization to spiritual values.

– Nonetheless, let’s speak about the situation in Armenia. According to the 2000 UN data Armenia’s woods covered 10% of the country’s territory, which we were supposed to approach 15% by 2015. How are we going to justify the daily reducing green spaces of the country?

– Back then I was assigned to localize the ecological issues for Armenia. And my approach was the following: in 1990 the woods of Armenia made 11,2% of the territory. Then we had some loss and this index downed to 8% and we had the goal to reach 9%. However, the Armenian government didn’t agree with this suggestion of mine. After a series of discussions it was agreed that Armenia’s woods should reach 11% by 2015. But the question is what we should understand by saying forests or wood lands. By the way, let me know that during the same period NASA’s data were released, according to which only 8% of Armenia’s territory is covered with woods. Later this number lowered to 6%. I have raised this matter to the RA government by saying that we bring up one number and the space surveys show a different picture. Afterwards, the Armenian government applied to the GTZ for examination. During one of the sessions they told us the following. The data of the RA Cadastre include a number of inaccuracies. The mountains are devoid of vegetation, forests are quite inaccessible, as formulated, and vice versa, the roads near forested areas formulated, it’s not, however, we were surprised when the government approved the end of the year, and since then it has contradictions of the lead.

– But the impression that the government sessions are unpredictable, and we cannot know every village or town on Thursday that the fate of the table.

– I think it is very predictable. The collapse of the Soviet Union after the problem was how to develop those years, many were opposed to my views, declaring that the World Bank is very pleased with our country, and I do not think it is a coincidence. The international financial organizations had the task to lower our country to the lowest level.

– In particular, the World Bank, yes?

– Yes, the World Bank in particular. And then we had a lot of disputes in the World Bank. If we jumped from 100% managed economy to the so-called absolute free market, when the factories have been openly granted to certain people as a result our economy collapsed and we only had left our natural resources. Armenia lowered to the lowest rank by becoming a pre-industrial state, which most of the African states are characteristic to. Then certain laws were created for the development of this business. I am not surprised at what’s happening in our country right now. We reached the bottom, where we do not have any place to go. We forced the jump across the abyss, the abyss into which set off the result, it was to be the first economy to collapse. It must adhere to this polarization, muddy water, a group of people should be super-rich, and others are pauperized.

– Today the main playing card of the oligarch, who uses the earth, is to intimidate the villager by depriving him/her from daily bread. In a general sense, the villager doesn’t care so much about the environment because he/she needs more protection than the nature. Is there an alternative to this?

– I am not one of the radical ecologists. And for me it’s the same how our citizens die – from poverty or ecological disaster. In fact we shouldn’t have either of those factors. The strategic mentality of the nature has an ecological basis. It’s clear some people only care about the quick buck and don’t worry about the nature in the long run. We have immense toxic accumulations. Of course, it’s much easier exploding them then examining what substances exist there. The current technologies allow us doing that but none of the companies wish to do so. In this case not only the problem of environmental pollution, but also the fact that we increased landslides. Of course, we cannot prove that they are a result of mining, but the experience shows that if we want to live on this land, you must cease expansion, and to use the closed method of toxic mines to work at about 500 mines have a mining license shall be issued each year by at least 30 that covers the whole of ulcers. We do not see the forest in the area, the lake shore.

– In parallel with that we sign international conventions. How can we understand the authorities?

– As a civilized country we should sign international conventions. Let us note that in international conventions the mandatory element is very minor.

– So the most important thing is presence?

– This factor is also there. The European Union or the United Nations are working with the state. But social control, the evaluation process, such as given in the questionnaire, and in most cases it turns out that the work was done in 90% and ecology sustainable development of the whole problem is that the questionnaire were the following questions. For example, the law was passed, the program has been developed, if implemented, I do not think these questions are targeted because the Western man does not understand it.

– Mrs. Danielyan, this year is a pre-election year. And many political parties will also be using the ecologists. To what extent will the ecological movement process suffer or win in this process?

– Back in the day I have learned that I shouldn’t endorse any political force. The best way is to use the ecologists and I personally wouldn’t want the ecological movement be used in any way. I personally work with the UN and should stay as far as possible from politics. At any rate, I think the ecological movement should be wise and not become the victim of the past circumstances. During the pre-election phase there are many promises but after elections these promises are ignored.

– In 1991-1994 you were also the minister of nature protection. And as an expert you have worked with all three of the presidents. What changes have you observed during this period?

– Let me first say that the saddest years of my life was my tenure of the mentioned years. I left the government almost dying. I cannot fully blame the authorities back then, which was ignoring the ecology because we were going through a war. When I was complaining that the trees are cut, ecology is destroyed they were saying that they put the last drops of fuel in the tanks. I was going home on foot after the government session at nights with a headlight. I had many offers in 1998 to submit various posts but I couldn’t do it anymore. The post also limits your options. What has changed during these years? I am very concerned with migration. The people, who had so much encouragement and thrill back in 1988 made through the war and blockade, are now leaving the country. I am terrified by that fact. Polarization pressures the society very much. But based on the recent experience I can say that (she means the rise of level of Sevan lake – M.M.) when you succeed in attaching the issue to high-profile statesmen then it is solved.

– And what is the way out as most of the time the solution are left midway?

– The state should be in its regulating role because during these years we got convinced that the uncontrollable market causes lots of problems in the ecology. The way out depends on every single citizen. So now the momentum has come and people should decide whether they will vote based on their conscience or by the motive of bribes, nepotism, etc. If we succeed in breaking these issues within us then our nation will be represented by worthy people in the National Assembly. But unfortunately we don’t see any positive change at this point.