Paruir Hayrikyan: "The problem of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia is a contempt for democracy"

The leader of the National Self-Determination Union, Paruir Hayrikyan
talks about his formula for democratic states, conflicts  and Russian
influence in the South Caucasus in an exclusive interview given to
newcaucasus.com. "Our conflicts are often infringed from outside ...
initiators of the conflict pursue other goals - on the one hand, they
talk about the peoples' right to self-determination, on the other -
they destroy people who utter this very word," - he said. According to
Hayrikyan, the region needs to get rid of foreign influence. As an
example, he cites the following fact: "In Armenia, the security
officer day is celebrated as a national holiday - the day of the
national security of Armenia ..."

- You claim that you have derived a formula by which it will be
possible to raise the level of democracy in different countries ...

- I have derived a formula to ensure that democracy was introduced in
the figures, as often while describing a democratic situation in a
country, a subjective approach is taken. When democracy is expressed
arithmetically, there are only numbers to be compared. The formula was
devised as a standard for measuring the level of democracy, but the
same formula helps to find better forms, to reach a better level of
democracy. The formula from the very beginning was based on human
rights and, in particular, on the right of a citizen to be an equal
participant in the democratic process. Everyone wants not just to be a
participant at the election, but feel that he is an important unit of
the social and political life.

No votes in favor of any candidate should be left out of the process
of country's government because of imperfections in the parliamentary
system. In a parliament each deputy has to vote in accordance with
votes he has obtained (including the ones transferred from the losing
candidates), that is, in each of the parliamentary voting as many
votes as the electorate which participated in the elections should be
involved. Thus, a parliamentary voting becomes more similar to a
referendum on the issue put to a vote, but, unlike a referendum, in
matters requiring a professional approach, not the citizens are
responsible, but confined deputies.

Once we gave a rough diagram of the state structure. This formula
reflects upon all branches of the government - executive, legislative
and judicial. By combining individual requirements of all major
branches of government and summarizing them in one formula, we, first
of all, have obtained a result according to which we can judge the
level of democracy. Secondly, we can understand where, in what sphere
and what exactly hinders the development of democracy in our country.
Locke and Montesquieu were talking about power separation, not for its
own sake, but so that citizens could make use of the results of the
struggle between different branches of government. In order to make
the citizen more secure. For some reason, politicians mostly ignore
these lessons and are mostly guided by their own benefit - in way
which makes the government more comfortable and easier. Therefore they
introduce limitations on representativeness of the parliament and
rights of citizens. The people is proclaimed the supreme source of
power, but often when it is actually possible to give a direct power
to the people politicians are handling through the parliament, calling
it a parliamentary republic. In short, this formula aims at returning
people to the real incites of the democratic state, the actual
separation of powers, improvement of a democratic system in their own
state. Of course, the formula is not an absolute truth, but it could
become one of the standards. Regardless of whether you are using a
yard or meter, you are using different standards of metric
measurements.

One can also pay attention to the fact that those who ignore
democratic principles tend to argue that they "own democracy." But
when you consider that democracy is based on human rights, on equality
of citizens, which is the supreme principle, the idea of national
democracies shall not be speculated about. I am a politician myself,
and I understand that politicians do not like to talk about it and I
understand why. I think one of the biggest drawbacks is that it is
allowed to talk to people about "own democracy." Let's look at
specific examples: the British and Dutch systems of democracy. They
differ from each other. A culture of tolerance, respect for human
rights culture is at such a high level, that the sustainability of one
of these democracies, particularly British one, is not clear at first.
The most important thing is to understand that democracy is based on
human rights and that any democratic system must first of all be able
to ensure equality of all the citizens, not only on election days, but
during the entire period between elections, during the entire process
of democratic institutions.
In two words, the formula is apt at measuring the level of democracy
in a state and with its help go back to the forgotten principles found
in the works of Montesquieu.

- What is the level of democracy in South Caucasian countries, as
measured by your formula?

- With this formula it is very easy to measure the level in various
states. I have created the formula, but I haven't taken the liberty to
measure the level of democracy. American experts have conducted their
measurements, which showed that we have a deplorable situation.
Georgia, until recent changes to the Constitution was, at least
according to this formula, a democracy of larger scale as compared to
the state of democracy in Georgia after the changes, since the
executive branch used to be elected directly by the people. Today,
after constitutional changes based on some unidentifiable European
models, Georgia, which could have been an example for Azerbaijan and
Armenia, is backwards. With regard to Armenia and Azerbaijan,
democracy is not the highest value for Azerbaijani and Armenian
politicians. They may occasionally rant about this, but I see that
democracy in Armenia is just a meaningless word. The essence of this
concept is of no interest to anyone and there is no desire to turn
Armenia into a democratic state. The same thing is happening in
Azerbaijan, which perfectly uses the Karabakh conflict, forced on us
back in the 20s of the last century, which back then was stirred up
also by Mikhail Gorbachev. By the way, conflicts are often used to
justify the shortcomings of existing democratic systems.

- In Armenia parliamentary elections will take place in 2012. Will
your party participate in them?

- We have not yet decided. We did not participate in the last
so-called elections because it was clear beforehand that there would
be no elections. A massive purchase and bribing of votes was
undertaken in an open and upfront fashion. A variety of governmental
agencies were used in order to introduce as many civil servants as
possible in the so-called "Republican Party". Neither I nor any of my
colleagues saw any sense in participating in elections in such format.
2012 is unlikely to host elections in Armenia in the true sense of the
word, but we are ready to turn this process into an action. We have
already applied for the elections and urged other political forces to
join us. We are ready to achieve a parliamentary majority with joint
forces and then pass a law on a full-fledged democracy, to amend the
Constitution in order to increase the frequency of elections, and then
dissolve the parliament and hold real elections. This is our program
and we are ready to unite with other political forces or start a new
movement on the civil level. Thus, there are two options - either to
unite parties, or to start a civil movement to democratize Armenia. We
consider these elections as the first step towards democratization of
Armenia and as soon as constitutional changes are introduced, we will
simultaneously hold a referendum on constitutional reforms and will
adopt a new election law. In the new parliamentary system, not a
single vote of a citizen who took part in the elections will be lost.
All the votes will reach the parliament and all the votes will be
taken into account at every parliamentary voting. Next elections will
be held according to the new system, and if our idea will be
supported, Armenia will have no head.  Constitution will become the
head of state; there will be executive authorities elected for a
maximum of three years, an elected parliament, either by proportion or
by majority, but with multiple members, not to lose any vote. The
parliament will also be elected for a maximum of three years,
preferably for two years. The institute of jury and constitutional
judges will be restored, and the judges of the second echelon will
also be elected. These changes will make Armenia a democratic state
and citizens will feel themselves the masters of their country, not
the tool in the hands of politicians. In this case, we will
participate in the elections, otherwise it makes no sense to fight
against windmills.

I understand that I have managed to make Armenia a multi-party
country. Previously Armenia had communists and our party. The parties
Dashnaktsutun and Republican Party were revived in Armenia on the
basis of our movement, and before them - the National
Self-Determination party, and even before that - The National United
Party. But that time has already passed, children were born and now we
have to work with them. But if children fell under the influence of
the KGB, it is the biggest problem ... Our political system should be
free from the secret system, first of all - from the KGB.

 In your opinion, what will it give to the country?

- Many experts believe that the development of post-Soviet countries
is largely connected precisely with this problem. Countries that got
rid of the KGB agents, like the Baltic countries and Eastern Europe,
today are in a very different political, moral and psychological
condition than those that are still under the influence of the KGB
agents, sometimes even in the open ... As an example, I want to note
that the security officer day in Armenia is celebrated as a national
holiday - the day of the national security of Armenia. It is not even
only shameful, but also frustrating for most of its citizens. How is
it possible that Armenia, which had 94 percent of votes against
Bolshevism, today celebrates the national security day!? There is
coincidence, it is a policy of demoralization.

- You said once that it would be much easier to overcome the Soviet
syndrome after the collapse of the USSR not individually but
altogether, as did the Baltic countries. Do you think there is a
prospect of unification of the South Caucasus?

- On January 12, 1988 leaders of Ukrainian, Georgian and Armenian
national democratic dissident movements gathered in Armenia. Out of 9
members, five were from Armenia, two from Georgia and two - from
Ukraine. Three of the nine later became national heroes in their
countries. This is an exceptional case in the history of mankind, when
representatives of various nations of an empire gathered, made a
decision and later became national heroes in their countries. Our hero
became Movses Gorgisyan, in Georgia it was Merab Kostava, in Ukraine -
Vyacheslav Chornovil. That is, at first, when we only started to meet,
representatives of the Baltic States were yet not with us. There were
meetings in Lviv, Tbilisi, and later in Vilnius we were joined by
representatives of other nationalities. We began working together. At
the Prague conference, we were joined by Azerbaijanis - Tofig Gasimov
and the chairman of the Socialist Party, Araz Alizadeh. The Prague
Conference was morally patronized by Vaclav Havel. At the conference I
was re-elected president of the Coordination Center. Incidentally, the
Center was founded in Paris and it was founded, though it sounds
immodest - by Armenians, Georgians and Ukrainians. Later we were
joined by representatives of other nations. The Centre brought
together all the peoples and for many it was surprising to see
Armenians and Azerbaijanis together. By the way, at the Prague
conference the future Azerbaijani foreign minister Tawfiq Gasimov and
future president of Armenia Robert Kocharian discussed together common
challenges and adopted a joint resolution. When you struggle for the
independence of your people, everything is obvious and clearly defined
- we are not independent, we are not subjects of international law and
we want to achieve it. Now the situation is slightly complicated by
the fact that you are a subject of international law, but your power
is often under the direct influence of another country.

In international practice, there is no practice of transferring
national property to another state for a national debt. This was
organized in Armenia by authorities, Russian chauvinists, businessmen,
the oligarchs. This was an impossible deal! I know that the
International Monetary Fund was astonished by this information. A
normal government will not allow such a disgraceful move. How can a
national debt be transferred in the sum of $ 100 million which is the
equivalent of 10-15 debts! Especially taking in consideration the
catastrophic economic situation in Armenia.

The main problem in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia is the disregard for
democratic principles. That's why I have been advertising the formula
in the last three or four years, hoping that we will agree on some
solution, not even necessarily on the change of destruction. At first,
we could become allies at the level of political parties and public
organizations, as it is not even a political issue, and automatically
become allies on issues regarding a huge range of problems. That is,
if we have a conflict situation and we do not look at it from a
political point of view, but only from a legal point of view, it is
much easier to find a solution to the conflict. A democratic
government which truly represents its people, will achieve an
understanding with other peoples in a much easier way. Today when we
have a conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan the South Caucasus, we
cannot talk about a full cooperation in the format of the region.
Nowadays those who talk about our inescapable lot to live next door to
each other and live in peace are almost declared traitors. The purpose
of my formula is not to minimize the tension in the conflict zones,
but indirectly it would lead to its resolution. If Azerbaijan realizes
that the original objective is to turn its citizens into full-fledged
owners of the country, that the primary task of Armenian politicians
and public figures is not to help Paruir Hayrikyan, Serge Sargsyan, or
Levon Ter-Petrosyan to become masters of Armenia but to make the
people masters of the country which is feasible with the help of this
formula, then other questions will be easier to solve. Why is it
difficult to solve common problems? Today we have no general
principles, we are talking about different values, different
approaches. When we have common values, when the value of an
individual is above all else, we can say that we live in the same
space, which is common to all. The attitudes towards conflicts will
change as well. In order to overcome antagonisms, it is necessary to
have common values, which are human rights.

When in the 80s we started to act in open, created an official
opposition party - Association of the National Self-Determination,
there was a Committee on Defense of Political Prisoners in Georgia.
During our meetings we discussed XII-XIII centuries, when there was no
independent Armenian state, but there was a general Armenian-Georgian
state, what is considered time silver age of Armenian culture and the
golden age of Georgian culture. We talked about what we should strive
for in order to create a federal Armenian-Georgian state. Merab
Kostava and I were guided by the fact that this historical experience
has already taken place it paid off. Unfortunately, my deportation to
Ethiopia happened later and Kostava was killed, so we failed to
develop this idea. Unfortunately, our enemies could then ignite the
Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, but I am very happy for the
Armenian-Georgian relations, despite the fact that due to objective
circumstances Georgia has often been frustrated by Armenia, I am
talking about close Armenian-Russian relations; in Georgia there is no
intolerance. The same thing is happening in Armenia. I am pleased that
the Armenian-Georgian relations are not at the mercy of international
provocateurs.

- Have you suggested the formula to other countries?

- I offered it to the Ambassador of Georgia to Armenia. He told me
that it would be nice to pass the formula to the Georgian opposition
in order for them to pass it in their turn to the Georgian
authorities. Then I sent an e-mail with the formula to Georgian
presidential staff members. By the way, some US congressmen and
academia representatives have expressed their interest in the formula.
The formula managed to intrigue even Iran.

- Conflicts in the South Caucasus seriously hamper the development of
all our countries. In your view, is there a solution to these
conflicts which will be acceptable to all parties, or are those
conflicts a Gordian knot?

- The world has seen many conflicts which remained in the past. At the
same time, new conflicts appear. The best way is to create a situation
where conflicting countries would have the same system of values. In
this case, the risk of conflicts will be minimal. Some conflicts are
fueled especially for political reasons. If peoples are guided by
similar values that are enshrined in constitutions, then solutions
will be found easier.

Although I was surprised to learn that Georgia intends to change the
number of deputies, as it was announced that the referendum was held
not on the whole territory of the country which is considered a ground
for the invalidity of results. According to this logic, the parliament
is not parliament and the president is not a president ... The
constitution must be sacred. External conflicts often begin because in
their own country people do not treat their constitution, nor human
rights with due respect. Unscrupulousness leads to lawlessness. Our
conflicts are often infringed from outside, but they are infringed
exactly because initiators of the conflict pursue other goals - on the
one hand, they talk about the peoples' right to self-determination, on
the other - they destroy people who utter this very word.

The European Union for us represents an exemplary reconciliation of
contradictions. When people say, Armenians, realize that they are
representatives and citizens not only of Armenia, but also of the
whole world and the attitude towards the value system will change and
the same will happen in Azerbaijan, Georgia, and desirably as soon as
possible in Russia , then many problems which result in conflicts will
automatically disappear.

I did not invent anything new with my formula; I just brought to the
logical end the idea of equality of citizens. We have the example,
experience of the European Union and we have to adhere to the
principles of equality even more than the Europeans themselves. When
we talk about freedom, we must remember that we need a freedom from
external pressure and external provocations. For example, when
Armenians talk about the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, they remember
the protection of Russia. I believe that the conflict must be resolved
either under the auspices of the international community, or without
any patronization at all, and surely not under the auspices of
Russian, American or Turkish influences.