Redistribution of Groong articles, such as this one, to any other
media, including but not limited to other mailing lists and Usenet
bulletin boards, is strictly prohibited without prior written
consent from Groong's Administrator.
© Copyright 2000 Armenian News Network/Groong. All Rights Reserved.
Night of the Long Knives Armenian News Network / Groong January 24, 2000 By Onnik Krikorian In an article published in the "Moscow Obshchaya Gazeta" last week, Yerevan sociologist Ludmilla Arutunyan expressed her concerns that the 'social underpinnings' behind the assassination of Prime Minister Vazgen Sarkisyan and several others in the Armenian National Assembly on 27 October 1999 have been disregarded. According to the article, some are already asking - and most notably, among the general population rather than in the political circles of Yerevan, - why Nairi Hunanyan could not have acted alone. In the immediate aftermath of the shootings, responses from journalists, newswires and media outlets varied. Armenia and the Diaspora attempted to discredit Hunanyan's accusations that the Armenian Government were 'drinking the blood of the Armenian people,' while the western media chose to interpret the events as a coup d'etat. On the streets of Yerevan however, the general population could not have cared less, arguing that such events were bound to happen. The amount of corruption and apathy in the corridors of power had become overwhelming. Indeed, the true nature of society in Armenia must seem like one of the most safely guarded secrets to the average Armenian. Few in the Diaspora are fully aware of the real disparity of wealth within the country, and the situation that the majority has to endure while a tiny elite lives a life of decadent luxury. Many among the population tend to believe that the wealth of this elite has come through personal contacts within government and through theft and deceit, rather than through honest, hard work. Even the most casual foreign visitors to the country question the true state of the economy after visiting Gyumri, the second largest city in Armenia devastated by the 1988 earthquake, and raise some very sensitive questions regarding the final destination of the millions of dollars in foreign aid that have poured into the country since independence. The poor state of the economy has also had other ramifications in contemporary society. The number of 'clandestine' abortions and an increase in narcotics use and prostitution represent the reality that Armenian society is in a real crisis. Many families have no option but to put their children into institutions, removing them from the healthy environment of a family unit, while others `less fortunate' resort to begging on the streets. Elsewhere in Yerevan, pensioners fight off the strays in order to scavenge through trash that remains uncollected for weeks at a time. Hunanyan accused the Armenian government of corruption and abandoning the Armenian people. If so many agree, why are analysts and journalists instead looking for other reasons? After the tragic events of 27 October, the Armenian Government should have instead owned up to the reality, and promised to put things right. Armenia's `dirty laundry' went on show throughout the world, and it seemed impossible that denial could continue any longer. However that is, in essence, what is happening. Those that deny that the statements made by Hunanyan could have been reason enough for his actions, do so often because they were the target of such accusations. But rather than acknowledge this reality, politically expedient forces in the country are attempting to use the situation to stage their own 'softer' coup. Every day, new accusations of complicity emerge, and not least against those prominent government and public figures who have enemies within circles close to the Military Prosecutor's Office responsible for the investigation. While some politicians, - some with serious accusations against them - are allowed to continue with their political and economic careers, others are unconstitutionally arrested and detained on arbitrary "evidence" that is never produced in the course of an investigation that has become Armenia's Night Of The Long Knives. Whatever 'confessions' Hunanyan may give from the isolation of a prison cell will forever remain in doubt, if only because of the concerns that international Human Rights organizations have regarding the tendency for police to resort to beatings in order to retrieve the statements that their superiors require. Other `explanations' for the events in the National Assembly have also emerged. Some accuse Hunanyan of representing an ultra-nationalist force that attempted to disrupt the peace talks between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the future of Nagorno Karabagh. However, they have not provided sufficient reason why Sarkisyan was chosen as the main target. The former Defense Minister was of such significant political force in both Armenia and Karabagh that the two republics are now considerably weaker without him. Some analysts have also suggested that the investigation itself is a 'softer coup'. Certainly, Special Prosecutor Gagik Jahangirian's background raises great concerns regarding the legitimacy of the investigation. It's still unclear how the president could entrust such a crucial matter to a man vitally associated with the falsification of the presidential elections of 1996 in favor of the then incumbent and leader of the Armenian National Movement leader, former president Levon Ter-Petrossian. Ter-Petrossian lost legitimacy and the support of the Armenian people a year later, and resigned to make room for current president Robert Kocharian. Now, Jahangirian's investigation has centered on supporters of this presidency. Kocharian is under intense criticism for the lax security that permitted the events of October 27 to occur, but the truth is that any control the president has had was always weak. Whether as Defense or Prime Minister, Vazgen Sarkisyan was the real force in Armenia, with the power to make or break presidents. As Sarkisyan died, so did the cohesion of the political system in the country. If anything, President Kocharian is showing significant political courage and strength under the circumstances, fully understanding that his failure will lead to greater political instability within the country. Whether Kocharian could have prevented the bloodshed in the National Assembly is almost irrelevant. Those responsible for the events of 27 October were instead the entire Armenian Parliament, and the local businessmen who have grown rich to the detriment of their own people. Life in the country had become the same as in other corrupt former-Soviet republics, with the socio-economic reality resulting in a well-publicized migration from the country estimated at around one million. Rather than address the reasons given by Hunanyan for his actions, political forces in the country are instead attempting to exploit the chaos that has emerged in a country where the political system is built on a deeply rooted anti-democratic mindset, and where, until recently, Vazgen Sarkisyan was king. Nairi Hunanyan may forever remain the only person to know his real motives, and whether he was acting alone or as spearhead for a greater agenda may be irrelevant. He has already achieved most of his aims by throwing Armenia's entire political system into disarray, and if there was any real determination to uncover the truth behind the events in the National Assembly, an impartial committee for the oversight of the investigation, whether foreign or domestic, would not have been summarily dismissed by the investigators. Instead, the manipulation of the investigations will damage the republic's standing abroad, at a time when the international community is monitoring its legal and judicial systems to determine its eligibility for integration into international bodies such as the World Trade Organization and the Council of Europe. Meanwhile, the Armenian People may well question why, after events of such magnitude, their legitimate concerns remain ignored. The sad reality remains that similar tragedies may occur again in the future, unless the Armenian government takes responsibility for the population of a country which, as Hunanyan pointed out, `people dream only of leaving.' ------------------------------------------------------------------ Onnik Krikorian is a journalist specialising in Kurdish affairs. His photographs and analysis of the Kurdish situation in Turkey and Armenia can be found online at: http://www.freespeech.org/oneworld/photo/