First Vice-Chairman of the Committee on CIS Affairs, Eurasian Integration and Relations with Compatriots of the State Duma of Russia Konstantin Zatuli is not the first figure banned from entering Armenia. Let us remind you that such a ban was put in cases of the Co-Chairman of the Coordinating Council of Armenian Organizations in France Murad Papazyan, Chairman of the Netherlands Committee of Armenian Court of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation Masis Abrahamyan and his daughter Syune Abrahamyan. There has been news of that sort regarding some Armenian figures of Russian origin since summer.
“Other figures, who were banned from entering Armenia, were not members of a Parliament” –said Aleksandr Markarov, the guest of “Aravot’s” “Areresum” (“Confrontation”) program and Director of the Armenian branch of the CIS Institute on this matter. “The difference in status here is significant, namely, it is not about public figures, it is about the 1st vice-chairman of an important parliamentary committee, whose activities have been closely related to Armenia since the 90s. And particularly, that was the person iniciating the issue of the genocide in the Russian State duma”
The other guest of the program, public political figure Suren Sahakyan noted, that he does not find the Russian Duma or the ruling faction “against the recognition of the Armenian genocide, but Zatulin, though, bent over backwards to force the bill through”
Responding to an observation, that a standpoint exists, which is that even if Zatulin had made an unacceptable announcement, a note of appeal could have been passed to the embassy of Russian Federation, but the situation now looks like a demarche against Russia, Mr. Sahakyan said: “No, I don’t think that an act performed against Zatulin can be classified as an act against Russia, for a number of reasons. For instance, it is evident that Zatulin does not represent the Russian ruling circles, because he represents neither Russia (formally) nor the ruling circles, because that person often talks about things he is unaware of. Moreover, the state policy is different from his actions. A prime example (last but not the only) of that would be his statement, that the Armenian authorities have approved of the extraterritorial corridor”. Sayakyan estimated that announcement as an intervention in the country’s internal affairs by a high-ranking official.
Read also
Eduard Sharmazanov, member of the executive body of opposition Armenian Republican Party noted: “Allies of Armenia can allow themselves to criticise the authorities out of the interests of the Armenian nation and statehood. Charles Aznaur used to criticise us, should we have banned his or many others entrance? The state and the government should be differentiated”. Suren Sahakyan said that bringing Aznaur as an example is not a good idea, and then added: “According to that logic, Sharmazanov could have opened another Lazaryan club in Russia and criticised Putin’s actions while being the vice-president of the National Assembly”.
A congruent opinion was expressed by the deputies of the Civil Contract party. Hrachya Hakobyan, for example, said to the journalists: “If a political figure from another country intervenes with our political life and makes announcements such as the prime minister needs to resign, or intervenes with other political issues, such a move was expected and appropriate, I reckon.” Aleksander Markarov said that he doesn’t believe that Zatulin calls for our protection, support or criticism: “He is an arrogant person, who has dealt with politics for a long time, and everybody is familiar with his attitude towards Armenia and Artsakh. And due to the fact that the corresponding decision was made a few days ago, his attitude towards Armenia, Armenians or Artsakh is unlikely to change”.
As for the policy regarding the positions of other countries’ citizens, it was important to have a common approach. And everyone has the right to express themselves, according to the political scientist, and the state has the right to respond accordingly. “If a certain politician from Russia encourages and welcomes the reforms taking place in Armenia, are they interfering in internal affairs or not?” – Aleksander Markarov asked his interlocutor. “No, the criticism is not interference either” –Suren Sahakyan responded. “When positive things are said, we do not regard them as an interference with internal affairs” – Mr. Makarov established.
Anna Israyelyan
