Yesterday yet another revelation of WikiLeaks was published, according to which ANC representative Davit Shahnazaryan did not rule out a deal with the establishment to free the political prisoners during a meeting with a representative of the US Embassy. The reaction to that article surprised me, because if such a deal was made completely or partially, it was absolutely right and justified. Would it be righter, if innocent people were kept in prison and they would win political dividends through that? There is nothing flagrant in cutting a deal, inherently it is a very healthy thing.
The history of civilized relationship between people is based on deals. It is not casual that German, French and English philosophers of 17th-18th centuries put forward the idea of social contract, which has become the foundation of the modern civilization. The states are governed not by monarchs “emerged” from unknown places and by the will of princes, but by the agreement, in other words the contract between members of the society. It is a different matter that we, Armenians, not having statehood for those 3-4 centuries, rely on the will of princes, on their so to say justified force. The most part of our troubles is caused by this. We deny the necessity and importance of a deal and are guided by the logic of “understanding each other”, “doing a favor to one another”, consequently “messing with each other”. A typical case that happened with one of my acquaintances in neighboringIran describes the “Asian” civilization. That acquaintance of mine got in a taxi and when he arrived at the destination, he asked how much he had to pay. The taxi driver started to say nice words that he was their guest, they were friendly nations etc. My acquaintance was trying to find out the amount of money for around ten minutes and the taxi driver instead of naming the number, was offering his verbal “sherbet”. At last, after long persuasion of the Armenian, the driver said a very big number that was 2-3 times more than the payment for the ride.
The unclear, ambiguous type of relationship is the result of lacking deal culture in our region. If you have ever renovated your house, certainly, you remember your conversation with a “master”. You say I will pay this much for the work done till this time. The craftsman usually doesn’t straightly say “I agree” or “I disagree”. He starts to tell what a perfect master he is and what work he has done inRussiaand then adds roughly the following, “Money is not important and it is shameful to have a conversation on money between us.” Kick such a craftsman out at once, otherwise, he will get on your nerves afterwards. It is much more preferable at work, in everyday life and in politics to deal with people, with whom it is possible to make a deal and who sacredly follow the articles of that deal.
By the way, when a diplomat says that the meeting will be off the record and afterwards the details of that meeting appear on WikiLeaks, it is also a violation of the deal to some extent.
Read also
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
