– Mr.Manuchayan, what replacements are taking place in politics of Armenia?
– There is nothing that would change the quality of life and people in the processes that are happening now. Those processes are directed by external interests and we should use those processes to reach a balance because at some point such processes may raise opportunities for Armenia to exist. Now Armenia does not exist because we have let the external philosophy to govern us; I mean the philosophy that a human being is coming to the earth for saving money. We were collapsed as a society and some individuals were appointed managers. When we are told that elections comply with European standards, and you think how this shameful thing can be in compliance with European standards, we should understand that this very thing is the European standard. They are telling us to move the issues of Armenia-Turkey relations and Karabakh conflict forward, and they will say that the elections were fair. The US secretary of State congratulated Serzh Sargsyan for such elections Very cheap trade is going on.
– In the Armenian political life parties are divided into pro-Russian and pro-Western poles. What do you think? Is Serzh Sargsyan more pro-Russian or more pro-Western?
– The Armenian political powers have divided those functions, but I think it is not acceptable as it makes as a toy in the hands of others. But here it is; the current government is pro-Western and is serving for the interests of the West. The prosperous Armenia and Dashnaktsutyun are acting as pro-Russian. The ANC tends to do so too.
– Was it due to the influence of the pro-Western police that some politicians resigned from the ANC and joined the Heritage or are waiting to see what they can do next?
– Yes. The political culture of the US is that they tend to have two political powers in a country – one of them being in the government and the other one in the opposition. They compete against each other and substitute each other, but ultimately the processes stay being directed by the US. Such processes are being observed in Georgia and we saw a tragedy facing that country as a result of such policy. Georgia is going to be faced with strategic tragedy because what is happening to the Georgian-Turkish relations has nothing to do with the interests and drams of the Georgian people. That is a great danger for Georgia. Georgia should have a balanced policy between Russia and Turkey in the region not to let either of those have privilege in relations with them. Now Georgia is in deep misbalance and the hops that the European and American politics directions will save them from Turkish expansion are too far from being real. Turkey is a very close and very aggressive policy country and is gaining privileged position over Georgia. In terms of the fact that Turkey has Azerbaijan in this policy too, I think that Georgia has no prospect for real independence of not revise the policy and change the direction.
– Aren’t you strict in your estimations?
– No, I was too soft.
– Does this mean that Armenia is implementing more balanced policy?
– Certainly. Unfortunately due tour history balance is everywhere in our policy; even in the most misbalanced actions.
– If the situation is so dangerous in that country, why do our politicians, including the president, ring examples of development of democratic institutions in that country?
– Democratic institutions failed to save Georgia from the tragedy of Ossetia and Abkhazia. Currently democratic institutions support the expansion of Turkey in Georgia.
– You said that the PA is acting as a pro-Russian power. Did the PA refuse to join the coalition due to the influence of the Russian policy or other inner agreements?
– If a political power makes a decision in Armenia, as a rule it is the decision of its patron. Now the political powers are in such situation, which is the reason why they are not political anymore. They are leverage in the hands of external powers to solve problems in this country.
– How are the incidents at the border and visit of the US Secretary of State to the region connected? There are opinions that with those actions Azerbaijan wanted to show its disagreement about the status-quo. There are other opinions as well, according to which these actions were stimulated by certain powers, including the West as well, to show to the world and the parties that it is hence impossible to keep the existing status and situation.
– There are a number of factors, but the main factor is different. I said what is the goal of the US in all regions, including in Azerbaijan. They don’t want to have a dictator or group of rulers who have a pyramid power and control everything. They have no mechanisms of influencing on that pyramid in case they want to do something different. The US wants to see a developed civil society and opposition in Azerbaijan, but Ilham Aliyev’s regime does not let it happen. That is why the US and allies attached criticized Azerbaijan recently. Aliyev does not give a place not because he is a bad guy, but he knows that a human being is coming to the planet to make money and have power. He has learnt it from American books and follows that philosophy. However, he is being told that the theory that is written in those books does not concern him as his team is not like that. Thus, his team must have an opposition so that the US can have a mechanism of influencing on them. Thus, Aliyev so that one of the two pillars under his legs is going out. One of those pillars is the totalitarian system in his country, and the other one is the conflict of Karabakh. When he saw that his main partners the US, Great Britain and Israel (these three countries have made a joint stock company that may be called as “Baku regime”) were trying to take one of those pillars, which is the lack of opposition, he decided to show that he as to make the other pillar even stronger. In this situation he has nothing to do but blame the opposition in not being democratic but being Armenia’s spy.
– What was the main goal of Clinton’s visit to the region? What did she want to see or find out?
– It is very difficult to find out what is the value of Armenia for the American policy. If the US succeeds in controlling Armenia, the problem of the Caucasus corridor will be solved and wins globally in the region. It is possible that in this region the main issue for Clinton is Armenia’s issue. We will be able to understand what Clinton’s goals are in the region after June 17, when we see what will happen in Paris. Those processes may show what is happening here.
– The issue of Karabakh conflict is in standby regime now and the issue of Armenian-Turkish relations is frozen too. What can be the developments around these two issues in the future?
– There will be no development in Karabakh issue. Now we are focused on status-quo, but we must look for solutions. Status-quo is also protected by enmity; we should find solutions to revise the situation. If there is a country named Armenia and people, who want to change the situation, they must have a will to do so. We were busy with that issue in early 90s but after that the owners of the world told us to focus on money and power. The Minsk Group process is their tool and leverage; it has nothing to do with us.
– Some people say that the processes of the Minsk Group failed to justify the expectations.
– It did not fail at all. You shouldn’t look at things from our point of view but from the prospective of those who developed those recommendations. They think that this process regulates the peace in the region as it may be necessary. If America saw that at some point they could make things be more beneficial for them, they were doing their best to push what they wanted. However, their main opponent Russia has learnt this trick and later on it will be more difficult for them to do so.
– Do you think that relations between Armenia and Turkey will not develop until the conflict of Karabakh is resolved?
– The Armenian-Turkish relations will depend on the relations between Turkey and the US, i.e. it depends on the future processes and pressure that may be necessary. The US wants to eliminate the hatred towards Armenia in order to finish Armenia’s absorption in the Western civilization space. They will use different tricks to solve this issue. However, this solution has nothing to do with us and it does not contain any positive prospect for us. Open door is a good thing, but an open door in front of the enemy is not good at all. We cannot expect good actions from that side. From this prospective the confrontation situation that we have now is ideal for us.
– Does the NKR conflict help Armenia become a factor? Can Armenia use that?
– There has been such discussion whether the conflict is a stone tied with our leg or a card in our hands. I think that logically it is a card in our hand. If our goal is money and power, the logic is different. And if we want to help Armenia’s development, it is different then. We were involved in that process in 88-90s. At that time we had the best statehood in Armenia – the most democratic and people’s statehood.