Observations
on 60th anniversary of the RA first president Levon Ter-Petrosian.Nothing
has been discussed so actively during last 8 years than Levon Ter-Petrosian’s
return to the policy, "revenge" and every word said and even not said
by him. Every positive and neutral mention about RA first president gives the
opportunity of detailed speeches to mass media and politicians who sympathize
the present authorities. These may have two explanations. Or they are worried
by Levon Ter-Petrosian’s return and try to prevent it. Or there is a necessity
of sharp speeches /there are more profitable than the praising/ and as the mentioned
politicians and mass media don’t want to speak or can’t about the present in this
way they have to interpret the past of our country in that way. The 2005-year,
which coincided with the 60th anniversary of the first president perhaps, will
be distinguished by the activation of international efforts of Karabakh regulation.
This, of course, will give various occasions to discuss the first president’s
name and his ideas.People’s perception of Ter-Petrosian has remained the same
in its basis though it has been transformed a little during 8 years: "Our
excellent country was destroyed, factories were closed, machines were sold as
scraps to the Persians and Turks, people died of hunger and cold" etc. That
legend has become typical for the people’s way of thinking and perhaps there isn’t
any rational power, which is able to change those statements. But the legend doesn’t
stop being a legend. First of all the country wasn’t "excellent". I’m
sure there isn’t any similar country but the citizens of different countries love
their non-excellent countries, as it is theirs. The second; neither Ter-Petrosian
nor even Gorbachov or Reign had magic wands for destroying the Soviet Union. That
state fell, as it was poor both morally and economically and politically. In other
words it was wasted more than worked so it was burst out. It is another thing
how it was burst in different republics and what damages causes to the peoples
of new independent countries. Thanks to both Ter-Petrosian and his associates
the damages were fewer for several times than in Georgia or Azerbaijan. The social
problems were the same /and still are/: for example in Georgia "the cold
and lack of electricity" still exist while it was stopped in Armenia at the
end of 1995 / under Ter-Petrosian’s rule/. But it is fact that our neighbors had
territorial losses but Armenia had territorial achievements. Certainly there
were serious mistakes and omissions during 1990-1997, much was spoken about it
and will be spoken. As the occasion of this article is the "anniversary"
let’s mention some of them: taking into consideration with the communistic personnel
/ beginning from Gagik Haroutiunian/, giving a lot of political and economical
levers to the army / and personally to Vazgen Sargsian/ after 1994, the appearance
of first "oligarchs" close to the authorities etc. All these privations
deepened, developed and multiplied after the change of authorities but the germs
of famous evils were formed in the middle of 90s. The time will correct every
appraisal. But today I think that the role of the first president on the whole
was too positive in our history. Certainly, the history doesn’t like "if".
But on the other hand we mustn’t believe in fatalism: "whoever was it would
be the same". Armenia got independence, the state and democratic institutions
assumed as a basis, free reforms were held in economy, Karabakh got freedom. It
happened mostly for the first president and his personnel didn’t hurry, acted
steadily without adventures and resolutely. What would happen if Vladimir Movsisian
was elected as the president of Supreme Soviet in 1990 or Paruir Hairikian was
elected as the president in 1991, I can’t say. But "it wouldn’t be as happened"
certainly.Finally these all are historical problems. But there is another
actual issue- Karabakh. Various opinions are published and will be published about
this issue in our newspaper but let me express my own orientation here: Ter-Petrosian
was right totally and the opposition was wrong totally in 1997. And it is totally
lie that Karabakh was going to be the part of Azerbaijan by the stage by stage
version of 1997. If the same version is discussed during the negotiations adding
with the idea of referendum then we must support for its solution. And we’ll live
in other Armenia and region after the solution of that issue. More civilized,
more independent and more developed about what Levon Ter-Petrosian and his friends
dream.Aram Abrahamian