Hovhannes Igityan: "In any case, changes in Armenia are irreversible"

Interview by David Stepanyan. Exclusively to Vestnik Kavkaza

The former members of the "Armenian National Movement" (ANM), Alexander Arzumanyan, Ararat Zurabyan, Hovhannes Igityan and Karapet Rubinyan, began the process of registering the new ANM party with the Ministry of Justice. Previously, the ANM was renamed the Armenian National Congress (ANC) and is headed now by the first president of Armenia, Levon Ter-Petrosyan. The former head of the Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Affairs of Armenia from 1995-1999, one of the initiators of the revival of the ANM, Hovhannes Igityan, talks about the reasons for reviving the party and the domestic situation in Armenia in an interview to Vestnik Kavkaza.

- At the founding congress of the ANC, Levon Ter-Petrosyan said that the ANM has turned into a country club after Vano Siradegyan had left it. Judging by your desire to revive the party, you have a different opinion?

- The work of the ANM, which stood at the foundation of the third Republic of Armenia was terminated under the pretext of changing its name. As the founders of the party, remaining true to the values of democracy and liberalism, we expressed our disagreement in connection with the removal of the ANM from the political arena and the attempt to replace it with an artificial entity, since we considered all these actions departure from the adopted ideology and principles. The objective behind re-registering the ANM is to preserve its historic name on the principles of democracy, collegial governance and transparency, as well as the restoration of constitutional order based on democracy and the establishment of liberal values in Armenia. In the last years, the ANC has been engaged in nothing more than the use of the financial and human resources of the ANM. As a result, the ANC has turned into a party of one man, "the ANC is where Levon Ter-Petrosyan is." This mistake, together with organizational problems and the disregard for the need to create a consolidated approach to the questions and proposals of all members of the entity has caused a significant reduction in the number of supporters of the ANC in recent years.

- Ter-Petrosyan has explained the rebranding of the ANC was due to the need to conduct a bourgeois-democratic revolution in Armenia...

- This point of view lies in the theoretical framework, and it is not the first time that it is voiced. I am skeptical about the feasibility of such a revolution, given the lack of necessary prerequisites, when the lower classes do not want to live in the old way and the upper classes cannot carry on in the old way. Ter-Petrosyan himself recognized this in 2008 when, taking advantage of considerable popular support, he was unable to carry it out. For me, his statement was not convincing largely because Ter-Petrosyan has not given any details regarding how he understands it. With the help of his words, he simply made an attempt to justify some of his actions which I initially perceived as wrong, in particular, the removal of rich people from power. Any actions of any party have to be assessed by the society, increase its popularity, as well as trust and support, increase the number of its supporters. In talking about the need for a bourgeois-democratic revolution, Ter-Petrosyan had in mind only the need for the removal of the two or three richest people from the pyramid of power.

- You have mentioned that the ANC and Ter-Petrosyan lost the confidence of the electorate in 2008 as a result of systematic errors made by the movement. Can you say that the movement of the "Revolution of Greetings", led by Raffi Hovannisyan, is making similar mistakes now?

- Hovannisyan does a lot for our citizens, and in doing so he is not guided by his own ambitions. Raffi had done everything he needed to do already before April 9, or the inauguration of the president. He didn't have to do anything else, the authorities were the ones who needed to act. He took an important step - led a successful propaganda campaign in the presidential elections, unlike many political powers he took part in the elections; one could say he won the election, and the public sympathizes with him, since he has demonstrated the reluctance of people to put up with the authorities, with the situation. At the same time, Raffi manages to oppose the government while avoiding aggression, being politically correct, which is his personal success.

Now it is the turn of Serzh Sargsyan, he has to make clear to the people how he intends to govern a country whose citizens do not accept the current government. To do this, the president should at least get rid of the phenomena and people who facilitated the creation of such a situation. On the other hand, he can pretend that nothing happened and continue being president for anther five years.

The second option for Sargsyan would be to start a dialogue with Hovannisian, but not in the classic sense of the term in Armenia based on the exchange of "wealth for power." It is necessary to cooperate in finding a way out of the situation, to analyze the reasons for the refusal of the people to vote for the government. There is not a single obstacle opposing the opening of a dialogue with the opposition.

Even if the movement of Raffi starts to decline, I do not think that the disappointment of the society will be as strong as in previous cases, simply because Raffi has not promised anything to anyone. He did not use any slogans like "Serge go away!", he did not urge the people to overthrow the regime. He simply urged society to demonstrate who the real boss of Armenia is, that the people do not want to live like this any more, and that was done.

- What would happen next if the dialogue does not take place?

- In any case, changes in Armenia are irreversible. The only question is when they will occur and whether they will be accomplished in one day. Today, the "Revolution of Greetings" at least helps to maintain protest sentiments among the population.  It is with this purpose that Hovannisian regularly visits regions, giving people hope for change in the future. It seems to me that changes for the better will definitely take place, which is proven by the fact that the taboo on criticizing the government is no longer widespread in Armenia. None of the people openly speaking out against the government have become subject to repression. There are several reasons for that. First, there are a number of them, and secondly, in fact a lot has changed in the country, and technological progress (Internet, social networks, video, photography) plays an important role in it.

The success of Hovannisian in the February presidential election was grounded in the fact that he was different from other people who are regarded as political leaders, as opposition. At a time when the Armenian people did not believe either the authorities or the opposition, a different person suddenly appeared. A western man, as our citizens imagine men from the West. The success of Raffi was a surprise both to the authorities and the opposition. If Raffi did not run for the presidency, "Prosperous Armenia", "Dashnaktsutiun" and the ANC would never have got so many votes. Each of these parties had its own reasons for not participating in the elections. If Raffi was not a different kind of a politician, the authorities would have no problem in "taming" him by offering him what is usually so eagerly accepted by other political parties: ministries, businesses, etc. But it just so happened that Raffi did not want any of it.