Ashot Manucharyan: “The new Armenian Constitution is a Western project”
Constitutional changes are still a topical issue for Armenia. Vestnik Kavkaza interviewed the former presidential head advisor national security of Armenia (1991-1993), Ashot Manucharyan, about the internal political situation ahead of the pan-Armenian referendum.
- How do you assess the situation for the opposition ahead of the referendum on the constitutional changes on December 6th?
- In Armenia, as well as in the whole post-Soviet space, political life is focused on the problem of who will seize power. Groups calling themselves the establishment or the opposition have almost no differences. Those who are in power provide the function of an instrument for foreign forces in organizing the country’s activity, while the opposition is trying to demonstrate that it would fulfill orders by foreign forces better than the authorities do. The authorities and the opposition are almost identical in their philosophy where a material aspect is much stronger than a spiritual one. The scheme meets another factor – directly shown gangsterism in power.
- However, the opposition stands against the project of constitutional reforms, but its resources are incomparable to the authorities’ resources. Is the main goal of the opposition to attract people to an active struggle?
- It is true that people connect their problems and troubles with the current authorities and believe that the referendum could be used for a change of power, just like any other arrangement which is connected with elections. Of course, the regime is trying to renew its hold on power by means of the new Constitution, but this is not all. The roots of the problem are much deeper. The so-called constitutional reforms are an attempt by foreign forces, i.e. Western forces, to impose a foreign system of values on Armenia. Unfortunately, the Armenian opposition uses only the thesis on the renewal of those in power to mobilize people, and it doesn’t try or want to understand the essence of the document.
- What can you say about the authorities’ position in this case?
- The authorities are adopting these changes to demonstrate their loyalty to those who are thought to be the masters of the current world order. Of course the project of changes is a Western project, I mean the current world order rather than the West as it is, because the West is the first victim of the world order. The suggested project of the Constitution is aimed at the destruction of national and traditional values which have being been created over centuries. He document indirectly presents foreign and unacceptable values for our society, such as homosexual marriages or a juvenile judiciary. The project contains a very cunning and devilish system.
- Can we say that some Western circles are trying to combine the Armenian authorities’ striving to renew themselves and the goal of implementation of constitutional reforms?
- The most important thing is that the international circles which are interested in adoption of the Constitution are trying to distract the leading geopolitical players, who strive to prevent the strengthening or spreading of the global dictat through talks about the renewal of the Armenian authorities. Often the dictat acts through legal documents, as one of the most important instruments of the current world order is the legal sphere.
- Are some geopolitical centers trying to prevent implementation of the constitutional changes in Armenia?
- If a force decided to prevent this, it would succeed. For example, Russia could see a challenge in this project from rival geopolitical centers. The West is trying to take Armenia away from Russian influence through this project and involve Yerevan into its own zone of influence. To disorient Russia, they use such a dummy: the desire of the ruling regime to renew their power. Meanwhile, it is only a curtain to distract attention from the real content and goals of the constitutional changes.
The role of the external factor is very significant in Armenia. The country is completely under foreign management. Unfortunately for Russia, it is not Russian management, as Russia influences a limited number of elements – the military base in Gyumri, the membership of Armenia in the CSTO and the Eurasian Economic Union. At the same time, the management is provided through thousands of strings. Our legislation is being created in the West, and almost the whole of the financial and informational spheres are also controlled by the West.
- Russia’s negative position on the constitutional reforms is explained by the fact that Russia’s influence will weaken in Armenia in case of their implementation, isn’t it?
- Yes, it is. Management technologies in a parliamentary republic are a badly studied and inaccessible scheme for Russia today. I think Russia sees a threat to its positions in Armenia in the project of the new Constitution.
- What do you think about the unexpected statement by the head of the Union of Armenians of Russia (UAR), Ara Abramyan, to form a party and participate in the 2017 parliamentary elections?
- Ara Abramyan is interesting due to the fact that Russia translates its position on the constitutional issue through him. I don’t think there are people in Russia, who have huge sums of money and head such important organizations as the UAR, who can suddenly appear in Armenia independently and express their independent thoughts.
- But Abramyan’s statement didn’t influence the preparation for the referendum by the authorities.
- In ‘Mowgli’ by Kipling, Bagheera the Panther regularly says: “I add a bull, which I have killed, to my words.” We have heard the words, and probably we will see a bull soon.