The 21st Century: The Era of Establishing Law and Legality
Editorial of the “The Covenant of Ararat” («Ուխտ Արարատի») periodical, No. 1 (15), February – March, 2008, pp. 1-7:
“The greatest responsibility for the further civilizational regression of Western Asia falls simply on Rome.” Hakob Manandyan, “Tigran II and Rome”, Armfan Publishing House, Yerevan, 1940, p. 11.
“If you ask about Armenia anywhere in Germany, you will mostly see confused faces and rarely hear an answer. “Armenia, who rings the bell…?”, Wolfgang Kashuba, Identity Politics. The Armenian Case, Armenia on the Road to Europe, “Antares”, Yerevan, 2005, p. 104:
———————-
Having survived the First and Second World Wars of the 20th century and the Genocide committed against the Armenians and others, it is not difficult to guess what great catastrophe humanity is facing on the threshold of a new, world-destroying war. The current turbulent course of events does not provide real guarantees of optimism.
It is clear that the only way to avoid all major and minor wars, genocides, and other crimes against humanity remains to be guided by international legal norms, which are clearly formulated in the UN Fundamental Principles and are enshrined in declarations and conventions. In the event of gross violation and exploitation of these norms, the Armenian people have repeatedly documented their viability, but today the issue already concerns the fate of humanity being led to destruction. Will the so-called international community be able to reorganize, confront and put an end to this great catastrophe that is already threatening the existence of all humanity, which gives the impression of a consistently implemented conspiracy?
World War III.
Back in 1990-95, the subject of political science debate was the purposeful process of global transformation of the world being formed by pathological thinking, which at its peak should be preceded by the Third World War following the neutralization of the UN. From 1990 to the present, all the analyses of the domestic and foreign policies conducted by the superpowers and a number of countries are, however, devalued in comparison with the proposals of the US presidential candidate McCain, according to which the UN should be replaced by a new international structure called the League of Democracy, and Georgia, Ukraine, Kosovo should be included in NATO. In other words, the scenario of World War II is being repeated. It is simply that, in parallel with the escalation of tensions in the Balkans, the plan to inflame conflicts in the Black Sea, Caucasus and the Middle East is also being put into action. This will begin no earlier than April, because according to the statement of French President Sarkozy, the process of turning the European Union into a superpower is planned to be completed in March. In other words, the main goal of the slowed-down revolution of the deceived European peoples, carried out for 50 years by the project of Alan Dulles, is being revealed: the task of turning the European region into a single superpower, and the planners need, first of all, to provoke the Third World War in order to restrain all those European nations and states with the military forces stationed in Kosovo that will try to hinder the plan and oppose the will of the supranational regime of the Euro-superpower.
As for the United States of Africa and the Middle East and the conflicts, military-political and other terrorist processes being provoked to create them, you can read about them in the previous issues of our periodical (See, No. 10, 11, 12, 13).
In this situation, we consider it dangerous that after the Russian presidential elections, Russian foreign policy may change as a variant of self-isolation beneficial to the West (as if: “We do not interfere with Russia, and let Russia not interfere with us”). However, it is obvious that as the conflicts escalate, Russia will nevertheless be dragged into chaos. This time, instead of Germany, the role of a wild tool is assigned to the United States, whose foreign policy, as is obvious, does not at all correspond to the interests of the US state and people. And how it happens that such a powerful state becomes easily controlled by others, will be understandable if you look at the US Constitution – the articles related to the president, the bills…
The main technology for inadvertently drawing many countries of the world into conflicts is again the artificially created great global economic crisis, which, in fact, has been underway since January 17-18, 2008. This will first lead to great global economic chaos, and then to a world war, the losses caused by which will make it possible, as salvation, to openly present the crazy idea of creating a world government. This is how it is planned, and what will come of it, life will show…
The question of the dissolution of the UN, following the example of the previous experience, the League of Nations.
It is no coincidence that from 1992-93 to the present day, the UN Yerevan office has only played an informational role, when at least a higher status and powers are required, taking into account the military-political activity in the region. Accordingly, it can be argued that the UN is not fulfilling its true mission in Armenia: it is busy with issues of smoking, family planning, women and children, religious sects and human Euro-rights. And the World Bank, among the UN structures, is busy with the problems of planned corruption of the Armenian education system. That said, the citizens of Armenia, based on their direct experience, do not perceive the UN as a serious international legal structure. Instead, a large number of state and non-state structures and offices of the European Union and the United States are very active in Armenia. Again, as in the 1930s The question of eliminating all progressive, sound thinking and international legal norms is posed. The problem of turning the UN International Court of Justice into a servile structure, making it meaningless in legal terms. By neutralizing the League of Nations, it was possible to unleash World War II. Therefore, on the eve of World War III, the logic of the steps that have been aimed at undermining the role and significance of the UN since 1995 becomes fully understandable. For example, despite the UN’s refusal, the USA and Great Britain invade Iraq. The UN representative refuses to serve in Afghanistan. UN missions and offices are exploding here and there. And finally, one of the most worrying recent steps – in the Kosovo issue, contrary to the charter, the UN Security Council is trying to cede its powers to the European Union.
Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, Kosovo.
The recognition of Kosovo’s independence cannot, indeed, be an example for the recognition of Artsakh’s independence, since they are contradictory realities (See, Yu.G. Barsegov, Obligatory Force of the Right of Peoples to Self-Determination and Means of Its Provision, Moscow, 1993, MGFA, p. 34). The Artsakh issue is a legitimate issue of liberation from occupation, regulated by the norms of international law. In Kosovo, the opposite picture is: foreigners, the so-called Albanians, have been settled in Kosovo since 1945, through a pre-planned, peaceful expansion, an invasion, and in the context of the well-known cases of the forcible dismemberment of Yugoslavia, the Serbs were forcibly expelled from the territory, becoming the majority there. By the way, it is similar to the manuscript of the USSR-Azerbaijan criminal agreement, which was implemented in 1921 with respect to Nakhichevan, and which, however, failed in Artsakh. In other words, the problem in Kosovo is to violate international law, to seize and divide territories, not to liberate them. At the same time, they are forcing nations to forget the concept of homeland, trying to erase the sanctities of nation, family, homeland from the memory of humanity. But since, according to the laws of nature, nations cannot forget their identity and abandon their homeland, they consider the destruction of not only the physical, but also the moral, spiritual and civilizational values of all ancient nations as a means.
Moral genocide.
Let us cite two examples: 1. The auctioning off of several dozen Christian churches in European countries, which is more destructive than the militant atheism. 2. The attacks of Euro-caricaturists on the saints and sanctities of Islam, which, in addition to sowing hatred, also lead Christian Europeans to moral degradation.
Cultural genocide.
This is the main goal of adopting the policy of the first crime against humanity of the 20th century, the Armenian Genocide of 1915-23. Cultural genocide is being carried out against all ancient civilizations, cultures of ancient nations. There are many examples and everywhere. Let’s remember Afghanistan, the destruction of Buddha statues and for some unknown reason by the Taliban, the looting and plundering of entire archaeological collections in Baghdad, the destruction of Armenian khachkars in Nakhichevan with the involvement of Azerbaijani military structures, the bombing and destruction of Armenian monuments by the Turkish army, the destruction and destruction of Serbian monuments in Kosovo, the absurd arson of the South Gate, the spiritual center of South Korea, for some unknown reason and on whose orders. There are many such cases, especially over the last 50 years. There is a beginning to this planned vandalism, and the goal is clear, as the English explorer Lawrence of Arabia expressed it: “…like the Armenians, like all the ancient nations that must be destroyed,” but the end is not in sight. Part of this program also includes the manipulation and distortion of the history of ancient civilizations and ancient nations.
New international threats and criminal tools.
In the last three thousand years of human history, the so-called “International Terrorism” is an unprecedented criminal phenomenon in its form and scope. The reason for its emergence is not discussed in detail. And the content and goals of the actions taken are not convincing either. It is another matter why the leaders of countries, politicians, and political scientists are silent when the real reason for the creation of this criminal tool is known. The reason is that the peoples of even the most aggressive Western countries are against violence and do not want to go to war. This became clear after the First World War, when the peoples of the countries involved in that global blood and death mess never understood who was fighting whom and why… and what were all those losses and tragedies for? When unleashing the Second World War, well aware in advance that the peoples were really against the new war, they gave birth to fascism, the so-called national socialism, which, in fact, opposed international socialism. And it was to avoid world enslavement that the peoples fought and won. As for fascism’s occupation and enslavement of European countries, it was also used only to convince the European peoples that it was necessary to create a pan-European state, an idea that was successfully developed over the past 40 years.
Today, the reality is different. It is not possible to deceive the peoples in the same way. Therefore, the entire potential of the armies and special services, under the name of “International terrorism”, was directed only at the population, the masses of the people, in almost all countries. That is, it was necessary to show the peoples who wanted to live peacefully and independently that, despite the presence of the country’s law enforcement and security structures, they are completely defenseless even in their own homes, because they can explode from gas or catch fire, in transport, which can also explode, or outside in public places, in maternity hospitals, kindergartens and schools. Such inhuman cruelty has never been seen by humanity. “International terrorism” is organized by certain special services that “create the weather” in the world and dispose of large funds. Unfortunately, some authorities and criminal elements of a number of countries also contribute to its implementation. It is no coincidence that terrorism, which was raging against the population in Yeltsin’s Russia, sharply decreased during Putin’s rule. And in Europe, it appears in a country whose leader or people are against the process of creating a common state called the European Union on some issues. As for September 11, it is known from American sources that the real organizers should be sought in the country’s special services. It is a well-known truth dating back thousands of years: no patriotic and national individual, motivated by national liberation struggle or other issues, can kill peaceful, defenseless people, especially women and children. These are a new type of hired killers, criminals, towards whom, by the way, European human rights require leniency and not to apply the death penalty.
Climate change.
Of course, there is a natural process here, there is also the greenhouse effect, as well as a callous and irresponsible attitude towards the urgent problems of nature and humanity. However, there is also the issue of the use of meteorological weapons, conditioned by a political factor. Isn’t it strange that no analyst in the world addresses the facts of the use of these weapons, when the USA used them back in the Vietnam War. Let’s also remember the 1968 USA-USSR treaty on the non-use of meteorological and geophysical weapons (artificial weather, tsunamis, earthquakes). It is clear that over the past 40 years they have become more perfect. Why is it also used in Europe? Because Europe should become a common state, a superpower. This weapon will help convince Europeans, for example, the Spaniards, the Portuguese, the Greeks, the Germans, and the English, that it is impossible to cope with “natural” disasters alone. A drought occurs, then forests burn, or a rainy season comes, and the harvest is lost, and either blizzards and frosts inappropriate for the given region occur. As a result, the European Union, as a “good uncle,” comes to the rescue and carries out appropriate propaganda that only as part of a common state can we be protected from all this. One thing is obvious: if before the collapse of the USSR the USSR and NATO possessed this weapon, then after the collapse of the USSR its “monopoly” belongs to NATO. It is not at all strange that the media creates such a misconception that the existence of such weapons is improbable.
Globalization or world power?
The exploitation of natural resources will be carried out through the Democratic League and other modern technologies of world domination, open borders, and programs to give sovereignty to communities. According to some provisions of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples of September 17, 2007, they will try to accumulate the natural wealth of the planet in the hands of supranational, suprastate corporations and capital. This is confirmed by the European draft of the RA Constitution, which was rejected twice by our people, which presents the policy to be applied towards the RA in the future. Great rights of ownership and sovereignty are given to communities, turning them into independent authorities separate from the state authorities.
By the way, Mr. Bukigo, the President of the EU Venice Commission, is excited that the new version of the RA Constitution was successfully passed, and is now offering his services for the “legal” settlement of the NKR issue…
The inglorious end of the US as a superpower.
There is the first attempt: the well-crafted artificial economic crisis of 1929. The same process is underway. Despite Franklin Roosevelt’s historically successful attempt to save the US, it is assumed that there is no way back for the US. Before that, they should provoke a war with Iran, expecting that this will spread to the entire East, according to Ralph Peters’ map, where the US should be greatly supported by Turkey, after which it is obvious that Turkey will remain helpless when America is no longer a superpower, and therefore, whether it wants it or not, it will submit to the dictates of the superpower called the European Union. It is noteworthy that last year, when Sarkozy announced the creation of a common Mediterranean state, Germany changed its previous position and agreed that Turkey would not join the European Union, but, as an Asian country, would be included in the common Mediterranean state. The very power of the European Union is now pursuing a policy of making Germany economically dependent, remembering past experience, so that it would be easy to manage, without its own initiatives and ambitions. So, moving the Finnish Nokia to Romania solves two problems: on the one hand, to suppress German ambitions, and on the other hand, to show Romania that it should rely only on the European Union and not rebel in the issue of separating its Black Sea coast. There is no need to particularly interest Bulgaria, since 30 percent of the country’s parliament are Turks, and they will gladly solve this problem without unnecessary expenses and promises. A few days ago, it turned out that Greece’s light industry is being moved to Bulgaria, apparently to weaken Greece, to bring it to its knees.
At first glance, it seems strange that all EU countries have become members of the Schengen zone, with the exception of Bulgaria and Romania. In reality, this means that in the near future, internal separatist processes should be expected in these countries, as a result of which their coastal parts will secede from these countries and join the common Black Sea state. This is planned to be implemented only after the Crimea and Odessa regions are separated from Ukraine, perhaps simultaneously (this explains the seemingly illogical behavior of Yulia Tymoshenko in recent years). That is why it is important that Georgia and Ukraine, along with Kosovo, become members of NATO, so that the creation of a common Black Sea state is fully guided and controlled by NATO.
Political or legal solutions to domestic and international problems?
Law has always been undermined as a result of the use of ugliness that are political solutions. Both in international and domestic problems. The 20th century became the most brutal and bloody century in the history of mankind, because after both the First and Second World Wars, the international legal solutions enshrined by the League of Nations and the UN were ignored. Preference was given to the so-called political solutions. And the so-called political solutions, in essence, were the realities of dictating and imposing their will on other countries from the position of the power of a superpower or superpowers. If before the First World War the international community prohibited the use of chemical weapons, it turned out that they were used in that war anyway. In order to prevent future wars, a number of new international legal norms, laws, and principles were created, which were naturally to be implemented through the activities of the League of Nations itself. They worked as long as the victorious and defeated countries were being restored. Already in the 1930s, when the task of provoking a new world war was set, the superpowers supporting it and the small countries under their influence rendered both the League of Nations and international law inactive. The same thing happened at least five to ten years after the Second World War. This process gained momentum in 1995 with the self-collapse of the USSR and the Socialist camp, during which, first of all, the rights of the peoples of all those countries were violated, all the provisions of the UN Declaration of Human Rights were violated towards them, and what is called international politics was moved from legal to the field of so-called voluntary-political solutions. As a result of the continuous discrediting of the UN over the past ten years, today the issue of dissolving the UN is shamelessly being raised. The question arises: What is it for the so-called political will figures of those powers, does a century-long human tragedy seem insignificant, when they are already provoking a third world war in a new way, day after day?
To say that it is an irreversible process and that it is impossible to stop the evil is wrong. It is not too late, it is possible to prevent it, only it is necessary that at least the majority of advanced countries, relying on the collective will of their peoples, stand up for the UN and prevent the aspirations of its discrediting and dissolution. Also, the UN should be guided by the path of making it a powerful and capable structure that can properly regulate natural processes of humanity. Also, regardless of the military-political power and aggressiveness of the state, every political, state, and public figure engaged in propaganda and preparation for war should be called to account in the UN itself. So that later, following the example of World War II, there is no new Nuremberg of bringing war criminals to justice and condemning them after the tragedy. (See, page 15, “Serbia to Sue Countries That Recognized Kosovo”)
Surely, the people of no country, least of all the United States, do not want to go to war, nor do they want other countries to go to war. Not to mention that the number of warmongers and instigators of war among the six billion people on Earth is not even one thousandth of a percent. The question arises: will the international community, along with its international structure, allow a few criminals to plunge humanity into global chaos, disaster, and tragedy this time around?
The European Union: A Possible Conflict Between the Superpower and the USA:
Since 1947, after deceiving, disorienting, and thoroughly developing the peoples of European countries with Alan Dulles’ famous program, the problem of transforming the European Union from an international structure of regional cooperation into a superpower is now openly posed. That is, through the rearrangement of the two poles of the former USSR and the USA, a new pole is being created – a superpower, without even asking the will of the peoples of Europe, and whether they want it or not… They don’t ask, because they know that at least the French and the Dutch have already rejected it in a referendum. They are right to say that all this is called “European standards” of democracy, because they have nothing to do with real, natural democracy.
Was it not from the upcoming positions of the head of the superpower or the “European standards” of democracy that Terry Davis, months ago, in an obviously arrogant tone towards the authorities and people of Armenia, throwing aside diplomatic behavior, making inappropriate and disrespectful comparisons, and making politically and legally inaccurate formulations towards the state and people of Artsakh? A big question arises: is the high-ranking official of the European Union not well acquainted with international law? If so, then he does not correspond to the position he holds. And if he is familiar with it, but disregards international legal norms, then he does not correspond to the real European standards of democracy, if there are any. By the way, the authorities of Armenia tried not to notice the fact, but we do not think that our people or the relentlessly passing time will forget Terry Davis’s words (See, page 16, “PACE Secretary General Terry Davis’s visit to Armenia”).
However, let’s return to our material. The founding document of the Euro-superpower was expected to be adopted in March of this year. Due to this, Europe was trying to postpone the declaration of independence of Kosovo until May. The US rushed into this matter and, in fact, divided the EU into two parts, jeopardizing the adoption of the EU Constitution and the formation of supranational authorities. This fact indicates that the US no longer refuses to cede its position as a global superpower to the EU.
Congo, Kosovo, Caucasus.
The developments in Kosovo in recent months have shed real light on a seemingly mysterious part of Ralph Peters’ article: “And for all those who refuse to imagine the unimaginable, declaring that borders are final and immutable, it is worth remembering that borders have never been static, stable. They have changed over the centuries and are still changing (from the Congo to Kosovo and the Caucasus).” At first glance, it is incomprehensible to mention these three territories together. However, let us remember that recently it has been stated in open text that Kosovo will be the headquarters for the accumulation of military and police forces of the United States of Europe, independent of European countries, the main role of which will be the implementation of police force operations against any European country opposing the supranational authorities of the EU. It turns out that the role and significance of implementing similar tasks is given to Congo, in Central Africa, against the countries of the United States of Africa. As for the Caucasus, it will establish control over the Armenian crossroads of civilizations and will establish control over the Mediterranean, Black Sea, Caspian unions, and will also coordinate the policy of the US, the EU towards these regions. This is precisely what determines the processes of intensification of the emigration of Armenians and Georgians from the countries of the region, especially Armenia and Georgia. Because the indigenous peoples will prevent the deployment of military and police stations in their countries. And the destruction of industry, the disintegration of science and education contribute to the intensification of emigration. As for those serving the NATO military base, that role will probably be reserved for the Kurds.
The real reason for the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
For several decades now, killing each other has become an everyday reality for Palestinians and Israelis. The question arises, haven’t they gotten tired of this unnatural way of life? What is the real reason for living this unnatural way of life? The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is conditioned by one circumstance: they don’t want Palestine to have access to the sea, because it does not correspond to the plan for the creation of a common Mediterranean state, where Israel should be without Palestine. There is no doubt that Israel would gladly agree even to the creation of an independent Palestinian state if all the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip were moved deep into the country. According to the data of the Euro-Landsat, which recently participated in the elections in the Greek part of Cyprus, in the coming months, Sarkozy will initiate the process of creating a common Mediterranean state, which will include the so-called Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, which is outside the European Union. It was with the same logic that the Palestinian camp near the sea in the north of Lebanon was demolished, because it, too, according to Ralph Peters’ map, should join the common Mediterranean state.
Democracy or neo-slavery?
For 20 years now, the phrases “European values”, “Western democracy” have not left everyday circulation. No less often, TV films show the Roman Empire as the cradle of democracy and the spread of civilization. It is overlooked that the so-called democracy of the ancient Roman Empire was a means of forming the power of a slave state through elections, which has nothing to do with natural democracy. The constitutions of the USA and Great Britain are cited as examples of Western democracy, but it is worth remembering that both the USA and Great Britain officially abandoned slavery only in 1860-65. Even at the level of political science of a schoolboy, one can discover that Western models of democracy are, in fact, models of slave democratic states with corresponding long-term goals, aspirations, and expectations.
European integration or the hegemony of a new European power?
Since 2001, Armenia has officially undertaken obligations under the so-called political course of European integration. After the failed attempt in 2005, it was no longer in dispute that the regional international structure called the European Union had revealed its true problem and, according to recent assurances, in the next one or two months, even against the will of the peoples of European countries, it will turn into a supranational governing superpower. The question arises, what to do now: continue self-deception and continue to submit to the hegemony of a superpower, or return to the international community as a free, independent and sovereign country conducting its own foreign and domestic policies…
Why has the international court not yet condemned the Armenian Genocide?
The fact that from 1921 to the spring of 1988 the people of Soviet Armenia did not have the right to raise the issue of condemning the genocide at the state level in an international court is explainable for well-known reasons, but unfortunately, what has been overlooked is that since 1986, Western policy has also done everything to prevent official Armenia from appealing to the UN and the Hague Court on the issue of genocide. It has also been forgotten that back in 1986, by order of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Armenia, the chairman of the Union of Writers of Armenia wrote a book about forgiving the genocide and not living in the past, which, by the way, was translated into Serbian at the same time. Why it was written became known after February 1988, and why it was translated into Serbian became known after the disintegration of Yugoslavia and the tragic events in Kosovo. It was expected that the Serbs would also have to be explained that if the Armenians had experienced such a genocide and were making friends with the Turks, then the Serbs would have to tolerate the ceding of their territories to the Turks. However, Moscow and the West, as well as the leadership of the Armenian movement, were unable to stop the popular demand for the adoption of a law condemning the genocide by the Supreme Soviet of Soviet Armenia on November 22, 1988. It is another matter that they managed to stop the issue from being taken to the UN and the Hague Court until the collapse of the USSR. After that, the West took on the role of a preventive.
As long as the Armenian authorities, listening to the, to put it mildly, exhortations of others, do not apply to the international court, they are thereby paving the way for attempts to repeat the genocide with the same brutality not only in Armenia, but also in a number of other countries of the world in the near future. It turns out that by doing so, they are contributing to the misanthropic, militaristic forces, for whom it will be extremely important to commit a number of crimes against humanity with impunity under the guise of the Third World War. It is no coincidence that the European Commissioners, with their peremptory exhortations, demand from the Armenian authorities to open the border with Turkey and establish diplomatic relations, without considering what border is being opened and between which countries. By the way, representatives of the Armenian political elite voice their readiness to carry out this instruction, without even thinking that they are being urged to become accomplices in a crime against humanity. As long as the criminal is not punished, the establishment of “good-neighborly relations” with him is, in fact, open propaganda of genocide, in accordance with the UN Charter and international legal norms (See, page 7 and page 32, “Trial of Turkish Writer Begins in Ankara” and “The Outrage of Jewish Genocide Scholars…”).
On the issue of providing political solutions to Armenian-Turkish relations.
In recent years, the European commissioners and emissaries who have been entering and leaving Armenia with great activity every day of God’s day, 365 days a year, sitting on the breath of our authorities, offer and impose only political solutions to all problems requiring an international legal solution. Peter Semneby, a participant in the discussions on the normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations in the RA National Assembly, certainly knows very well that the issue is entirely within the international legal framework, at least with the conventions “On the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide” (1948), “On the Non-Applicability of Statutes of Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity” (1968), “Measures to be Taken Against Propaganda and Incitement to War” (1947).
That is, from an international legal perspective, the normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations implies:
- According to the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the country that committed the Armenian Genocide in 1915-23 and its successor, Turkey, will be condemned in the UN Hague Court. Here it is appropriate to recall the words of Garegin Nzhdeh: “To forgive Turkey one crime means to condone two more.”
- According to the same convention and the UN Charter, the elimination of the consequences of the genocide, which means: the liberation of the occupied territories, ensuring the safe repatriation of the Armenians through UN peacekeepers, and compensation for damages.
- When the Republic of Armenia becomes a country living in a fully regulated rhythm, it will be possible to establish diplomatic relations between the Republic of Armenia and Turkey.
To say that Peter Semneby does not know all this would be a lie, to put it mildly, but in his speeches he urged the RA authorities to establish relations, open the borders, presenting it as a political solution and an issue requiring political will. In response, the RA NA Speaker says that the RA authorities are capable of demonstrating political will, both to establish relations with Turkey and to open the borders. The worrying thing here is that both speakers know very well who in a democratic country decides policy, who demonstrates political will, and who implements it. Both know very well that in a democratic RA, policy is determined by the people, in the form of the manifestation of the collective will of the people. They also know very well that by a national resolution adopted on August 23, 1990 and The Declaration of Independence of Armenia, ratified by a national referendum on September 21, provides both the form and content of the normalization of Armenian-Turkish relations in accordance with international legal norms.
Confiscation of illegal weapons or disarmament of the militia?
In 1988, after Sumgait, the Soviet government disarmed all Armenians living in our region. This was followed by the brutal attacks of the Azerbaijani savage hordes on the unprotected settlements of Artsakh and the Republic of Armenia. Is it worth recalling now what the real value (and not the price) of a single hunting rifle or a single rusty pistol was in those days… In 1908, the Western Armenians were disarmed by the revolutionary and constitutional calls of the Young Turks, and in 1915 the Great Armenian Genocide took place. In 1918, the Armenian-Turkish Treaty of Friendship signed in Batumi disarmed the Western Armenian volunteers who had achieved victories in May and the Eastern Armenians who had gone out to fight for liberation; in 1920, the Turkish armies launched a new attack on Armenia. In particular, point 6 of the Batumi Treaty stated: “The government of the Armenian Republic undertakes to actively counteract so that no gang is organized and armed within its territory, as well as to disarm and disperse all gangs that try to hide there.” Today, a peace or reconciliation treaty has not yet been signed with Azerbaijan, moreover, the latter threatens with a new war and aggression against Artsakh and the Republic of Armenia every day. The question arises: on whose advice or political will was it that the campaign for the disarmament of the Armenian militia was carried out openly or covertly during the presidential elections of the Republic of Armenia? And how will the comprehensive self-defense of Armenia be implemented, in the event of a possible invasion…
Armenia and Armenianity.
It is a fact that the economy of the Republic of Armenia, unlike 1988, has been brought to such a state that it cannot withstand this threat of global chaos even for a few months, maybe a few weeks. This is not done by chance. It is dictated by orders and exhortations from outside. However, the situation is not at all hopeless, and if desired, in the event of implementing a national state policy, it is possible to quickly restructure the economy and withstand social and economic pressures. As for the scenarios of military operations and conflicts in our region, then in that case it is much easier to organize, and we are confident that all the difficulties we have prepared will come to naught, since the Armenian people have nowhere to retreat and have accumulated experience of self-organization for centuries. The time has come for the ancient nations and ancient civilizations, condemned to destruction by certain circles in the West since the beginning of the last century, to speak their mind and do their part (See, page 6, “In the modern world, they destroy those who kneel”).
In 1988, Armenians and Armenia sounded the alarm, the bells of which have not died down to this day. This is the reality when the question of being or not being is put before all humanity, which was the basis of the entire bloody 20th century, therefore, there is a natural reality. Humanity, in the end, must get rid of this ugliness leading to self-destruction, and Armenians must restore all that they have lost.
Armenia, based on its millennial political tradition, should not participate in this new global chaos that has been unleashed. It should call on the advanced countries of humanity to switch to comprehensive, effective self-defense, and in no way participate in the Third World War. Let the West wage war among itself, if its peoples will allow it.
Tigran Pashabezyan
Editor of the “The Covenant of Ararat” («Ուխտ Արարատի») periodical
