Tuesday, April 15, 2008

Hypocrisy Challenged:Rights come with Responsibilities

[sent out by the Save Armenia Action Group]

The final conclusion of the PACE meetings regarding the recent events in Armenia defied all logic. Example after example was given of fraud, restrictions of free speech and press, unlawful imprisonment and use of force in Armenia leading up to, during and after the elections. Yet the fundamental conclusions of the initial OSCE report stood. With now 10 dead and many more injured, over 100 imprisoned, and revocation of free speech, press and the right to protest, one wonders what other rights must be removed and lives destroyed to convince the impartial PACE, or any other organization for that matter, that the elections of February 19, 2008 in Armenia cannot be legitimized.

As with all Rights, the right to express an opinion which will be respected and seen as objective carries with it responsibility. This is especially true when the opinion directly contributes to violence and destruction. Weak statements in the aftermath of such violence and in the face of increasingly obvious truths are made in large part to satisfy contradictions, to maintain veneers of integrity and to satisfy consciences. Organizations move on, but peoples and nations are left in the wake of these paradoxically noxious interventions and opinions. There are two reasons that responsibility is not taken for consequences, and they are not mutually exclusive. The first is indifference. While the formation of organizations and committees to help spread and institute democracy is applauded, there is no true investment in such principles, and as such, as long as there is no direct impact of a small country being torn apart, there is no need to take any responsibility. The second is a sense of superiority, be it moral, cultural, psychological or otherwise. Giving oneself the right to interfere deleteriously, without regard to consequence, to loss of human life, is setting oneself not only apart, but above, from these realities.

Undoubtedly there are numerous challenges in contradicting an already published statement. What is the use of yet one more organization on security, cooperation, or democracy that cannot stand up for the principles on which it is founded. In light of that, those courageous individuals who have been consistent with the principles that these organizations are meant to uphold are to be commended.

One dares to hope that the outcome of the meetings this Thursday to be held in the US Congress will be more in line with the latter group.

Save Armenia Action Group
April 14, 2008

via Tzitzernak

6 comments:

parisan said...

//The final conclusion of the PACE meetings regarding the recent events in Armenia defied all logic. [...] the fundamental conclusions of the initial OSCE report stood.//

That means the political international political situation has not changed since the publication of the first report. The West is obviously NOT interested in supporting real democracy in Armenia.

//Example after example was given of fraud, restrictions of free speech and press, unlawful imprisonment and use of force in Armenia//

They must be doing it just to keep some pressure on the current so-called government, perhaps in the hope that will allow them to get a better deal over the Kaghabagh issue -- who knows what the West promised to Azerbaidjan in exchange for the collaboration of that country in case of an eventual attack on Iran?

Anonymous said...

What is so surprising? The elections were regarded as the best in nearly 2 decades by observers. The radical opposition pushed for a confrontation and got it. The state used force to restore order. With both sides armed, it is no surprise that people were hurt (somewhat surprising how few died).

This wasn't about democracy. This was just a power struggle, and Levon didn't want to admit defeat without a fight. He got one. Sad that so many followed him to a dead end.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 2:48.
I think you misunderstand the meaning of democracy.
Democracy is about power struggle.
It's when the the votes determine'who wins the power struggle, and not the fraud.

As for teh statement that the elections were regarded as "best in the nearly 2 decades by observers", could you please provide a link to the words that you quote.
No such phrase was ever said by any of the observer missions

nazarian said...

I think it was the government officials that said that they were the "best in the nearly 2 decades by observers". Of course, they were misrepresenting what the actual reports said but I'm sure no one was naive enough to believe that.

spm said...

I dont like such simplistic conclusion:
"The West is obviously NOT interested in supporting real democracy in Armenia."
The west is usually interested in supporting the democracy, whenever it does not interfere with OIL or geopolitics. Since there are no oil reserves in Armenia, my guess is that geopolitics are in place.
Now, from the geopolitical point of view, the west should be interested in a candidate that will remove country from under Russian dominance and deliver it to the west (see numerous examples from Balkans to Georgia via Ukraine). Was LTP or any other candidate suggesting that? No.
What LTP was suggesting? A more conciliatory tone with Turkey. Is West interested in that? Here comes the most interesting part. Apparently, Americans are more critical of Armenian elections than Europe. So the West is a little divided here. The Western Europe is using Armenian card to prevent Turkey from entering EU and they are NOT INTERESTED in Armenian leader mending fences with Turkey.

It is working out so conveniently: Rojik regime gets extension to keep robbing the country, Russians get obedient satraps in Caucasus, Europe keeps playing hide and seek with Turkey, Armenian Diaspora rejoices every time an insignificant European parliamentarian mentions Armenian Genocide. And all that in exchange for a few thousand unhappy Armenians. Excellent!

Anonymous said...

Refering to the request OSCE announced that the 08 presidential elections were "mostly in line with international standards."

What election since 91 (17 years ago) can claim such an endorsement by the international community.

Before everyone gets whipped up into hysteria, please don't kill the messenger. I am merely reporting.