Sargsyan says "going to Kazan in high spirit and in anticipation of a constructive dialogue".

The Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan on Wednesday, 22 June 2011 addressed the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. In his speech he touched on issues connected with the Karabakh conflict, regional issues, the state of democracy in Armenia and Armenia's relations with Europe.

 

 

The following the full text of the President's speech (source www.president.am)

 

Mr. President,
Mr. Secretary General,
Distinguished Members of the Assembly,

I would like to start by expressing my gratitude for the opportunity to address the European audience through this distinguished forum, which has played a crucial role in the process of enrooting democracy in Armenia.

Twenty years ago, in September 1991, Armenia declared independence, attaining the dream of many centuries and generations, and reuniting with the community of sovereign states. Ten years later, in 2001, Armenia acceded to the Council of Europe, reaffirming a shared historical and cultural legacy with this European family of nations. Today, stand before the Assembly, I recall these milestones with a sense of pride for the achievements of our people and our state in the last two decades.

Having experienced various oppressive regimes, my people know too well the price of freedom. The history of my people is one of creation and struggle. Freedom and peace have been our dream for centuries. We are now en route to our dream.

The people of Armenia have made their historic and irreversible choice. Our road to becoming closer to Europe has been unique in a natural way. However, there have been obstacles, which are not natural, such as the artificial and unlawful blockade imposed on Armenia by our two neighbors. However, in spite of all the difficulties, our society knows precisely where it is going, and why it has chosen this particular route of development. For us, it is a homecoming to the European civilization and cultural realm, to which we belong, and where we have been ever-present.

The Council of Europe is indeed the institutional embodiment of our common system of values. Its mission encompasses the entire Continent, defining Europe not purely as a geographical term, but above all, as a common cultural and civilizational platform of values and identity.

My people have throughout history paid too high a price for the right to worship these values and ideas, which at such times in history were alien to our particular region. As a consequence, we were silenced in the most brutal and horrendous way. The Council of Europe signifies the promise that such events are not to be allowed to reoccur on the European Continent.

In the last two decades, the Council of Europe has been a vital partner for Armenia in the process of state building and strengthening of democracy. In Armenia, some even joke that our political system has three components: the government, the opposition, and the Council of Europe. The joke, however, actually reflects the strong involvement of the Council of Europe in the change process currently underway in Armenia.

Dear Colleagues;

In 2008, our country experienced serious problems and challenges. The steps taken by the government to overcome the consequences of the tragic events of March 2008 have been discussed in detail with all of our partners, including those in the Council of Europe. We have sometimes had serious discrepancies and have respectfully disagreed with each other’s assessments. We have, however, benefited from the exchange, the wisdom of the experience, and the constructive dialogue. Short of it, it would have been impossible to move forward after those tragic events, steering clear of new confrontation and disaster. Allow me to extend our respect and appreciation to the co-rapporteurs for Armenia Mr. Prescott, Mr. Colombie, and Mr. Fisher, as well as Commissioner Hammarberg for their productive and persistent engagement.

The Armenian government has profoundly believed in and pursued the aim of sustaining progress along the democratic path. No doubt has ever been cast on Armenia’s democratic future, even in the direst moments of the domestic political crisis. This very conviction has also underpinned the logic of the measures taken in the last three years, especially in recent months, with a view to promoting a healthy political environment in our country. This determination also lies at the heart of the comprehensive and continuous reform of all the structures aimed at further consolidation of democracy in Armenia.

We learn.

We learn to listen to and respect each other’s views.

We learn and gradually adopt the understanding that the government and the opposition are not enemies. Strength is not best demonstrated by attempting to eliminate the other side.

We learn tolerance and shape a culture of dialogue.

We learn not to reciprocate insults, and we learn to consult a wider circle of stakeholders on key issues.

We learn to honor and appreciate the accomplishments of former leaders. We learn not to shun away from hearing constructive criticism and reviewing our decisions.

We learn to live by another set of rules.

We learn as a society.

In this Assembly, for you as representatives of countries that have deeply-rooted democratic traditions, my words may appear self-evident. However, I would like to assure you that this process is crucial. We have to graduate from it, and doing so requires an enormous effort and perseverance. We are ready for it. We will not hesitate to use every opportunity to take a step in this direction or make our message clear.

Ladies and Gentlemen;

We are indeed proud of our achievements. In two decades, Armenia has implemented wide-scale democracy building. Since achieving independence, especially after the 2005 constitutional amendments, much has been done to strengthen democracy, the rule of law, and the protection and promotion of human rights. Our country has seriously and irreversibly aligned its ways of living with the rules of the democratic and liberal world. In this process, the advisory and institutional assistance provided to us by the Venice Commission, various OSCE structures, and recently also the European Commission, have been indispensable for us. The impact of the European Court of Human Rights, a unique and important supranational structure promoting human rights, is omnipresent in our country.

The 2008 political crisis revealed the vulnerabilities of our legal framework and practice, providing an additional impetus to our efforts. As a result, the legislation underwent serious revisions. Fundamental reform of the police system is currently underway. The 2012-2014 Judicial Reform Plan is now being elaborated with the aim of safeguarding judicial independence. Important changes have been made to the Criminal Code articles regarding mass disorders and seizing of power by force. The legislation was revised in order to guarantee the exercise of the right to freedom of assembly. A very different philosophy underlies the new law: a presumption in favor of facilitating the legitimate exercise of the right, rather than restricting the freedom of assembly.

A comprehensive review of the legislation with a view to eliminating corruption risks and bureaucratic procedures is high on our political agenda. An Anti-Corruption Council and Anti-Corruption Monitoring Commission have been created and are operating effectively. A Public Service Law has been adopted, requiring public disclosure of the property and income of over 600 high-ranking public servants and persons affiliated with them, as well as a set of ethical rules.

A major effort is underway to improve the Law on Television and the Radio. Legislation was enacted to decriminalize defamation, which has been a significant step in support of the freedom of speech.

Our team has worked with an active group of EU advisors to develop an extensive strategy to promote reforms over the next three years, which will harmonize and bring under one roof the processes of change occurring in various areas.

We are determined to continue the reforms. We recognize that Armenia cannot develop without further fundamental improvements that will perhaps be no less painful than the ones implemented in the past.

Ladies and Gentlemen;

The people of Armenia are the main actor and driving force of progress in our country. I rightfully take pride in the maturity and balanced attitude of Armenia’s society, the principled approaches of many civil society organizations. They secure a comprehensive and speedy process promoting and sustaining the core values of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. We are building and consolidating our institutions and democracy in this particular framework of diversity.

The next milestone along this path will be the parliamentary election next spring.

The Armenian government, like any other democratic government, undoubtedly attach great importance to the role of fair and transparent elections for further development of our statehood. However, free and fair elections are not enough. It is also necessary that the elections be perceived as such by the public. To this end, the recent adoption of a new Electoral Code is certainly worth mentioning. The new Code has been developed on the basis of a review of all the relevant reports of observer missions. We believe that it will not only allow conducting free and fair elections, but also guarantee the full acceptance of the election results by society. The Armenian government will spare no effort to conduct the elections in full compliance with our Constitution and laws, as well as our international commitments. We are grateful to the Council of Europe for the persistent support and counselling of its numerous structures in this area.

We will cooperate in this vital area with all the institutional stakeholders of civil society. We are ready to accept the advice and support of our international partners. We are ready to utilize all the existing mechanisms and to create opportunities for the most transparent domestic and international monitoring of elections. Most importantly, the upcoming elections should take place in an atmosphere of public trust and fortify our achievements.

We do not look for shortcuts in our reforms or democracy building. Neither are we looking for political praise by the international community. Our intention is not to prove to others that the path chosen by us is non-fallible. We do not attribute failure to “objective” limitations such as the unresolved conflict or the inability of neighbours to normalize relations with us. I am nonetheless confident that what we do today will last. We do expect, however, that the Council and the Assembly will demonstrate political credibility and apply fair and consistent rules in assessing the member states.

Ladies and Gentlemen;

Peaceful and just resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict remains the most important issue for us. The negotiations are conducted in the framework of the OSCE Minsk Group. We are grateful to the co-chair states for their efforts. Importantly, the presidents of those states are personally engaged in the resolution process. It does, undoubtedly, inspire great hope.

I believe you would agree that the most important current and potential contribution of the Council of Europe to this process is the promotion of tolerance. To this end, we note with pain and concern that hotbeds of racism and xenophobia still exist in the territory of the Council of Europe.

The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance, in its recent regular report on Azerbaijan, reconfirmed the extreme level of Armenophobia and racism prevailing in that country. We regret this fact, because it is hard to imagine such a situation in a member state of the Council of Europe. We regret, because we clearly understand that the poison of intolerance strikes most heavily the society bearing such poison. It also troubles us because:

- Azerbaijan is our immediate neighbor,

- The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict remains unresolved in our neighborhood, and

- We attach importance to the necessity of progressing in the process of resolving the conflict.

In two days, a trilateral meeting of the Presidents of Russia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan will take place. In the run-up to the meeting, the co-chair states have exerted all efforts to secure finalization of the basic principles of resolution. We are talking about solving the issue by means of mutual concession. However, our situation would seem like a concession to the side that is looking for the convenient excuse to shoot at us. In such a situation, it will be very difficult for anyone to persuade society in Armenia, or society in Karabakh - the indigenous Armenian people living in Karabakh for centuries - that it is necessary to make certain concessions to a country where there is such intolerance and such extreme racist feelings towards Armenians.

Even under these circumstances, we travel to Kazan in anticipation of progress, as we attach great importance to regional stability and development, to securing a safe future for the generation growing up in Armenia, Nagorno Karabakh, and Azerbaijan, and to demonstrating good will and a constructive approach. However, we all should realize that an agreement can be finalized and effectively implemented only when the patterns of Armenophobia and racism are eliminated in Azerbaijan and an atmosphere of trust is formed. Naturally, no one may question the inherent right of the people of Karabakh to live freely and safely on their land and to be the masters of their destiny.

Thus, what can be expected of the Council of Europe:

- First of all, not to harm the process. The short-term impact of uninformed debates allows the parties to avoid lasting solutions that could otherwise emerge in the peace talks in the frameworks of the OSCE Minsk Group.

I am confident that the overwhelming majority of our colleagues at the PACE, who have expressed or will express a desire to discuss any issue related to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, have done or will do so out of good will. However, some can still act on the basis of inadequate information, which can indeed undermine the process. Therefore, I urge all of you to exercise some restraint. The main guidance should be the principle of causing no harm.

- Is it possible to help?

Certainly, it is. Regardless of different visions for the final resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, one thing is certain. Karabakh has been, is, and will remain a part of Europe, albeit unrecognized. Do we realize that society in Karabakh today is a part of European society, a part of the European family regardless of the de-jure status of Karabakh? Has the time not come for the Council of Europe to engage directly with Karabakh in terms of its primary functions of protection and promotion of human rights, formation of civil society, democracy, tolerance, and the like? Would it not be much more logical if the Council of Europe first engaged with Karabakh before expressing a desire to discuss matters related to Karabakh, with the participation of the people of Karabakh in such discussions?

Dear Colleagues,

The collapse of the Berlin Wall heralded the elimination of dividing lines in Europe. Unfortunately, twenty years later, our region is still waiting for its dividing lines to be eliminated.

Two years ago, we initiated a process of normalization between Armenia and Turkey, which would have allowed, through the establishment of diplomatic relations and opening of the border, to gradually overcome the divide that had existed for almost a century. I would like to note that, throughout the process, we greatly appreciated the inspiration and permanent support of not only the mediator states, but also the international community more broadly, including various senior officials of the Council of Europe. Unfortunately, in spite of this support, Armenia-Turkey normalization process ended up in a deadlock.

The sole reason was that Turkey reverted to its practice of setting preconditions, and failing to honor its commitments, which rendered the ratification of the signed protocols impossible. Having faced the wall of disappointment and mistrust, I cannot predict when the window of opportunity will reopen. I regret to say so, but it is the reality.

It is important to emphasize that Armenia initiated the process with good intentions, true to the 21st-century imperative of peaceful coexistence of nations and peoples, all on the backdrop of Turkey still not only failing to recognize, but also engaging in a policy of blunt denial of the Genocide of Armenians committed in the Ottoman Empire in 1915. Meanwhile, Armenians worldwide are expecting an adequate response. Our tireless efforts, and hopefully also the efforts of those concerned about crimes against humanity, will henceforth remain focused on the international recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

However, we are determined not to leave this problem unsolved for generations to come. The normalization of relations between Armenia and Turkey is important not only for Armenians and Turks, but also for the whole region, I believe even for the whole of Europe in terms of creating an atmosphere of peace, stability, and cooperation. The unlawful blockade of Armenia must come to an end.

Ladies and Gentlemen;

Allow me to conclude by restating my deep belief in the future of a common, comprehensive, peaceful, and prosperous Europe. If Europe is an idea, a platform of shared values, then it should be true for all of Europe – from the Atlantic Ocean to the Urals and beyond, without groupings or divisions. Europe cannot and should not tolerate new dividing lines - tangible or intangible. The Council of Europe should become an important political arena for Europe-wide comprehensive discussions and collective efforts aimed at the advancement of European unity. It is commanded by our common responsibility towards future generations.


Source www.president.am

www.commonspace.eu

 

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).
Editor's choice
News
King calls slave trade a 'shameful chapter' during Commonwealth address

King calls slave trade a 'shameful chapter' during Commonwealth address

King Charles has described the transatlantic slave trade as a "shameful chapter of history" that filled him with "profound sorrow" as he opened a summit of Commonwealth leaders in the Caribbean. He said the trade in enslaved persons "still casts a shadow" over the association of nations. There have been calls from some for the UK to make a formal apology for its historic role in the slave trade ahead of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (Chogm) in Antigua and Barbuda, but there was not one in the King's address. Prime Minister Andy Burnham, also at the summit, has said that he is open to Britain issuing a formal apology but has ruled out financial reparations. While there was no direct apology, the King did offer some contrition - and there was also an acknowledgement that he had personally learnt more about the legacy of the slave trade. He said: "The transatlantic trade in enslaved persons still casts a shadow over these islands and other members of our Commonwealth. "As I have said before, that shameful chapter of history is one that fills my heart with horror and my soul with the most profound personal sorrow." (click image to read more).

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)