Modern  processes  in  Armenia

                   

The main topic of my report is: “Armenia in the epicenter of the ethnic explosion: genocide and experience of survival.” My small republic with the population of 3,5 million, concentrates all the problems existing in the Soviet Union.

It’s ecology, economy, new men in the power, social questions and national contradictions, problem of political rights and self-preservation. Being first in the process of the realization of the perestroika slogans, we are standing now the problem of survival under the danger of new genocide.

Survival is a problem of all, the whoe humanity stands it now. It has general level of ecology, world economics, political and military relations and international cooperation. Then arrives the inter-state level for Nation-States countries, and inner functioning of the multinational states. Here the ethnic factor is of a great importance, because national contradictions and their suppression bring violence and explosions. Ethnic violence, when it’s a tool of the state national policy, brings genocide in its local or annihilative form of Holocaust.

So, old approaches to living both market and planned societies are exhausted. All of us need new strategic ideas. Although for some smaller nations, as Armenians, the risk of survival is much higher. That’s why we are interested in the accumulation of the world experience in the sphere of the early warning of genocide and adjusting of the interethnic contradictions from the level of national and social psychology until political bargaining. We are eager to coordinate the research activity on survival, seeking for some integrals, useful for all. We believe that Armenia should be as an experimental zone for new ideas, their probe-stone and active cultivator. We do welcome the specialists and institutes, interested in.

Analyzing processes in Armenia in the environment of perestroika, we have to talk about genocide and Armenian history. As a socio-political phenomenon genocide has been analyzed in the main details. However, the most important point is to get the sources of destruction and to understand what is possible to do with them. If we do know the mechanism and source of danger, then we could try to diminish or neutralize them. So, the veritable diagnosis and recommendations get the priority. //-226

Armenia focused the public attention from the February 20, 1988, when the regional session of the Mountainous Karabagh Soviet had adopted a decision to appeal to Armenian and Azerbaijanian republican Soviets on a question of its reunion with the Motherland. Before this session, similar decisions were adopted on the district’s level, and a technical referendum had been held. This phenomenon was unprecedented in the Soviet reality. Republics were created in the earlier years; such territory as a Crimea has been transferred from Russia to Ukraine in 1954, but never before such a decision had been made by the people themselves, in a democratic way, and with respect towards the norms of legitimacy.

The reason of the unprecedented initiative was the policy of the national discrimination in the Azerbaijan as a whole, and in the Karabagh particularly. It was, and it is the policy of the unbearable conditions for Armenians and their flee from the Autonomous Region. Discrimination included an active demographic policy with the aim of changing the ethnic composition there. The republican government forbade studying Armenian history at schools and had limited courses of the language and literature. Watching the Armenian TV was not possible technically, although the distance between borders is only 7 kilometers. Immediate cultural ties between us were not allowed, and authoritative historiography in Azerbaijan had been rewritten. People were told they are not their entity, but Armenized Azerbaijani. And in fact two peoples have different religion, culture and languages of the different linguistic families, and even in Anthropology an Armenoid as a peculiar entity exists. In the small region of the 4,4 thousand square kilometres rich with more that 1.600 ethnic historical monuments from 4th until 19th centuries, churches were molested and exploded, using their stone for the road and building construction. Only 64 of 1.600 were officially registered, and an Armenian church in Fizuly was buried in the artificial hill with the inscription “Glory to the Communist party of the Soviet Union” on its top.

The employment policy meant that no person with the higher education, gotten in Armenia, could get a job in Karabagh. Distinctively extensive such a pressure was in the spheres of administration, law and medicine. The links of communication were in the remarkable bad conditions, particularly roads. Contrary to conditions in the villages, inhabited by Azerbaijani, the Armenian ones lacked gas, drinking water and water pipelines. Constructed irrigation systems or electric-power stations were serving for population out of Karabagh, but not in it. Administrative industrial staff was removed out of autonomy too.

Thanks to all this measure, the proportion of the Armenian population there had fallen in 1926-1979 from 94,4 till 76%, although the birth-rate was quite comparable. During these years only 1 of 10 Karabagh Armenians was remaining in the region. In 1981-1985 investments per capita in Karabagh were 2 times less, in 1986 - 2,7 times less, comparing with Azerbaijan. And all the region had only 18 kilometers of the railway lines. As a whole, //-227  in 1970-1979, 10 thousand Armenians and 35 thousand Russians emigrated from Azerbaijan annually. If according to official Azerbaijanian data, 41,2 thousand Kurds lived in their republic in 1926, having their autonomy there in 1923-1929, then now in official Azerbaijanian data there is neither Kurds, nor Autonomy. In Armenia, however, during the same 1926-1976 years Russian population had grown 3,6 times; Kurdish - 3,4 times.

So, the demographic policy, employment, the investment policy, com- munication and cultural ties, trends in official historiography manifested a national discontent. That’s why from the very beginning people knew their problem was political, and sought political solution.

Their demand had a historical  background of the fate of the Autonomous Republic of Nakhijevan, placed on the Armenian territory, but under the admi- nistration of Azerbaijan. This region had 40% Armenian population in 1917, and no Armenians now. In 1922, June 24, the Soviet Azerbaijan government officially forbade the return of Armenian refugees to their homes. This decision had been  reinforced on May 29, 1926, and is in force till now.

That’s why a peaceful mass demand was so unanimous. Its high discipline, legality, respect towards the state institutions spread the democratic explosion in the political life of the USSR. The Karabagh decision of the 1988, February 20, was assisted next day by the demonstration in Yerevan, capital of Armenia.  During these three days, however  the Soviet mass-media had been keeping silence. And on February 23 an official news program “Vremya” reported, that Communist party Central committee qualifies the appeal and demand as “controversial to the worker’s interests.”

There was an explosion in Armenia. People have been told, that Party knows their interests and needs better, than they themselves. Karabagh was placed under the Azerbaijanian administration by the party decision of the 1921, July 5. That day there was no even voting. A bit earlier, in accordance with the Moscow Treaty of 1921, March 16, between Russia and Turkey Nakhijevan was given to Azerbaijan as a protectorate. Those times, the Soviet Armenia was considered to be an independent republic, but had not even participated in the discussion. And now, when unsatisfactory results of the party decision were evident and brought into life such a massive popular movement, Party was telling to people, that it appropriates their interests and decides their needs.

The very first day had shown, that the double and triple subordination, imperial outlining of the borders had been created to deny people’s right of their soil and self-decision behavior. The demographic mixture of nations and rewriting of their history served the same aim. In 1920 the Soviet Russian commissar for foreign affairs G.Chicherin and Lenin were simply saying about the Armenian Karabagh and obligation to respect population’s will. “The Autonomy creates at the Armenian part of the region,” - gives evidence the Azerbaijanian decree of 1923, July 7. It had pronounced the creation of the Autonomy, blaming the //-228  Russian Empire for the genocidal policy of the annihilation of the smaller nationalities. As the best evidence of it there had been reminded the mass pogroms in 1905-1906 in Transcaucasia, called the Armeno-Tatar war.

In 1988 Armenians had to listen that it’s absolutely impossible to understand, if they live on their own Motherland, if they have a right of their land, and whatever unbearable the discrimination may be - they are allowed to leave their home, but must submit. The result of denial was such, that in 3 days after the officious statement on TV, the number of participants in the demonstrations had grown from 30 to 300 thousands. There was practically no crime in Yerevan. On February 24 the strikes had began, what was very uncommon for the Soviet environment. It has been the first time, that common people reminded the official circles who sustains whom. And the representative of the Central committee had confirmed the first attempt of pogrom in Aghdam, Karabagh, with human losses. Then an appeal of M.Gorbachev to both republics followed, and Yerevan has decided to retain strikes and began working. And the same day, February 27-29, the Sumgait pogrom began.

It was well organized. The first secretary of the Azerbaijanian Communist party and head of the Council of Ministers came immediately before. The latter and the secretary of the city Party committee had participated in the meetings of February 27. Stones had been brought and iron tools prepared in the city industrial plants. Additional gangs were brought from Baku by buses. No telephone working and lists of addresses in the hands of attackers. And complete non-interference of militia, rejection of medical aid.

The mass-media kept silence. No official consolation, practically no pu- nishment or accusation. The genocidal action of massacre, which reminded the darkest days of 1915, had been called a mere hooliganism. It was a shock. As a nation, Armenians lost 1,5 million inhabitants in the annihilative genocide, organized in 1915 by the government of the Ottoman Turkey. After this Holocaust the Western, Turkish Armenia had ceded to exist. Yet no one could think it is possible in the Soviet milieu.

The Sumgait pogrom had repeated all the atrocities and sujet of the 1915. Although its aim was local. It had to halt and frighten people, because they tried to improve their political status. The state officials tended to treat Karabagh situation as a socio-economic, but not a political one. However, socio-economic aspect is supposed to be basic, so it means, that the problem is more fundamental. Besides, when you are given money - it’s a grant, but not a guaranty. Political right is just a guaranty against a discrimination, that is a point. A state may give you a fish, but you want to study how to catch it and be more independent.

If there are the advantages of socialism, then the basic one is a guaranty of social security, social defense. Yet the pogrom in Sumgait has exposed that not //-229  any people or person do have it. The massacre exposed, that a state doesn’t perceive its obligations towards men and nations, especially if they are small. Philosophy of the social contract is not imbibed in the political thinking until now. A people as a bearer of the sovereign rights is not recognized by the Soviet state. That’s why Karabagh has become a probe-stone of the reconstruction and was cardinal for the success or not success of democracy in the USSR.

The place of action was chosen with logic. New industrial city, where 17 thousand Armenian inhabitants lived as a dispersed minority, what was making him extremely vulnerable. A similar attempt of pogrom was made also in Kirovabad, but at this place population of old Armenian quarters had undertaken the self-defense. Sumgait was only 22 kilometers far from the capital of Azerbaijan, so actions were easier organized and assisted. Besides, due to the silence of the Soviet mass-media people simply didn’t know about the decision, made in Karabagh.

This pogrom had refreshed the historical memory about the massacre of 30 thousand of Armenians in Baku in September 1918 and of 40 thousand of them in the March 1920 in the heartland of Karabagh, its main city Shousha. Genocide as a political response to the national question by the implementation of violence and oppression do demands the serious attention in the 20th century environment. Technological enforcement makes the implementation of genocide more and more efficient, bringing the smaller nations into the more and more vulnerable position. So, in any social circumstances, if a state is totalitarian, it implements deportative and violent policy towards small national entities easier and easier. Distinctively in conditions of crises.

The bloodshed was needed to blockade the political regulation of the question, because there was no other argument to reject. Organized, peaceful and legislative respectful people had to be opposed  by the violent mob, so than no one could acknowledge that common rank and file people are not so foreign to the norms of democracy. However, immediately after Sumgait, on the 9th of March, 1988, the USSR Communist party Central committee and its political bureau had created their first commission in the long rank of commissions for the studying of the given question. But no political qualification of the massacre followed.

The second shock in Armenia had been brought by the centralized mass-media, which was calming down the public tension and then had been spreading something vigorously hurting. Such publications had extremely stabilizing effect. Besides, an industrious creation of the negative image had not been mere a disinformation, but also a conceptional impulse for the new assaults.

Remarkably strong was inflictive effect of the article “Emotions and conscience,” published in the daily newspaper “Pravda” on the March 21. All the Karabagh Movement was assigned there to corrupt elements, egoism; //-230  and false exposition of the Karabagh Committee was presented. All the writing was so incorrect an unsuitable, that the special correspondent of “Pravda” in Armenia Yu.Arakelian had officially renounced his signature under the printed material. The publication had created a serious distrust towards the official system of information. It had also exposed, that policy of information would tend to create parity between people in the peaceful demonstrations, and participants of pogroms: between organizers of the Parliament sessions, and killings. The meanings’ relocation game began.

There is a crucial difference between national and nationalistic. First meaning contains an intensive development on its own. The second one means a tendency to live on someone’s account, using oppressions and system of privileges for certain ethnic groups. But in the Union mass-media a will for the free development had been nominated nationalistic, and a right for discrimination and violence had not been blamed. The genocidal action of pogrom was not blamed, because it could hurt national feelings. We had been told, that an entire people could not be accused, that if we would blame a pogrom, all the nation may be hurt. The historical experience, however, showed the danger of the nazism Furthermore, having this outrageous crime unblamed, on the March 26 the soviet army detachments had been sent into peaceful Yerevan. During the World War II, just because it can attract broader masses, and in this case public awareness should be mobilized. Intentional silence about Sumgait induced the new massacres in Kirovabad, Baku, Fergana, Osh, Novy Uzen. Even after the Sumgait, Armenians in Mountainous Karabagh were told and are told now that they must retain under domination of the republic, where the massacres of them are organizing successfully by the powers.

Furthermore, having this outrageous crime not condemned, on the March 26 the soviet army detachments were sent into peaceful Yerevan. Their first action was to restrain Opera square, place of meetings, called in the city Square of Liberty. From the summer of 1988 the legislative fighting began. It was accompanied in Armenia by the vigorous meetings, sittings, hunger-strikes, when people demanded to make their Supreme Soviet functional as an official national voice. The Armenian Supreme Soviet had to respond to the next steps of Mountainous Karabagh, who has answered to blockade, organized in Azerbaijan from the month of February, with the purpose to coerce its economic subordination to the given republic.

So, on June 13, 1988, presidium of the Azerbaijanian Soviet had published a special resolution, rejecting appeal of the Autonomous region, addressed to Baku from February 20. Then, two days later, on June 15, an Armenian session of the Supreme Soviet, pointing out the article 70 of the Union Constitution on the right of the free self-determination of nations, has given an agreement to adopt Karabagh in the composition of the Armenian SSR. The Armenian Soviet has addressed to the all-Union Supreme Soviet with appeal to solve the noted question of the administrative transfer positively. The Session of the June 15 had blamed on behalf of the nation //-231  Sumgait, and expressed its consolation to the families of the killed and all sustained.

In immediate response the Azerbaijanian Supreme Soviet session of June 17 has rejected the Armenian address. And on June 21 the Mountainous Karabagh session have adopted a decision to accept the immediate Union jurisdiction and to transfer the Sumgait trial under the Union Supreme Court jury. The all-Union jurisdiction had been a compromise, which considered the political equality of nations not regarding to their size and number. This concept had been presented by the Armenian Communist party organization at the Union 19th party conference on July 27, but didn’t get a positive response or concern from the all-Union institutions.

On July 12, 1988, the regional Soviet session had adopted a decision of its detachment from the Azerbaijanian composition, and on July 18 the all-Union Supreme Soviet presidium responded with a repudiation and a creation of the novel commission. And from September 21 the Autonomous region and the neighboring Aghdam district were put under curfew.

Next political peak had been arising in the mid-November-December. An impulse for it served a provocation; and the reason was the economic cooperation of Karabagh with the entire Armenia. Being nervous about this cooperation, the Azerbaijanian official Information agency had disseminated on November 17 a message, that in the so called sacred place and ecological resort Top-Khana in the Mountainous Karabagh Armenians build their industrial enterprise. In a reality, there was nothing sacred for Azerbaijanians and nothing special ecologically in locality, called Khachin-tap. People could be easily sedated by the Union mass-media or by the simple translation of the place on TV. Although, it was not done.

On November 17 meeting in Baku had begun. The demands were: to halt any construction, to create an Autonomy for the Azerbaijanis in Armenia. and to liquidate the Autonomy of Karabagh. Once and again the Autonomy was perceived as a mere property of republic without any inalienable rights. This kind of approach also works on the all-Union level. The demanders also didn’t want to mention, that their compatriots do have an autonomy in Armenia, because the Autonomous Republic of Nakhijevan, being totally situated on the soil of Armenia, is administered not from Yerevan, as it could be expected, but immediately from Baku.

From November 21 the participants of Baku meetings were shout- ing slogans “Sumgait” and “Free the heroes of Sumgait.” An enormous portrait of one of the gang leaders had been ornamenting the building of government. In the raised agitation mobs circulated around the city, and from November 23 the pogroms had widespread all around Azerbaijan, keeping as targets //-232  the Armenians of Kirovabad, Shamkhor, Mingechaur, Kazakh. On November 24 Baku had been announced to be on the special regime, but the meetings continued till the night of December 4/5. From December 5 pogrom had begun in the capital, but it met an active self-defense from the Armenian side. From this time being, the necessity of Armenian self-defense had become the national concern and concern on both unofficial and official levels.

However, exploiting the initiative moment of self-defense, when its necessity was apparent, and when it had become unavoidable, the official mass-media got a possibility to talk about Armenian terrorism, aggression and danger for Azerbaijani population and peace in the whole country. The barbaric acts against Armenians were never called neither terrorism and aggression, nor the danger for the peace in the Transcaucasian area.

It was at this time, in the end of November, when the reactive actions of deportation had for the first time taken place in the Armenian republic. Human losses had been registered, although never praised. And it was acknowledged by the Armenian official circles, that they could not guarantee the security of the Azerbaijani population under the given conditions. Until the end of November the Union mass-media didn’t mention the problem of refugees; from the month of November it was using and reasoning the problem through the fact of Karabagh Movement.

On December 7, 1988, the Armenian republic had been stricken by the horrible earth-quake. It had devastated one third of the territory, hardly damaged second and third biggest cities, and located in the epicenter city, Spitak, was totally destroyed. The earth-quake brought the huge human losses, with the half of a million homeless. At the same days of the shock and despair two factors were influencing primarily the social mood.

In the light of Baku fiesta and earth-quake celebrating telegrams, members of the publicly credited Karabagh Committee had been arrested on December 12, and a visitor to Armenia M.Gorbachov accused people in nationalism. The leadership expected, that a fact of the earth-quake itself would dismiss all other questions.

An attempt of the urgent transportation by the airplanes of the babies, saved from the earth-quake was made, and arise an extreme repudiation. Babies were planned to be adopted in the families all around the Soviet Union, and the action had been envisaged as a gesture of internationalism. However, as many times before, it ignored the national feelings, distinctly the national spirit of the numerously small people. As a nation with the experience of the ethnically destructive genocide, not big in number and a bearer of the strong and rich traditional culture, the Armenians have close inner ethnic and family connections; and are overprotective towards children. That’s why the removal of children raised a thunderstorm. “There are no orphan children in Armenia” - burst out people.

The second factor  was an unprecedented virtuous assistance and relief activity of the whole world. In a situation, when we were feeling ourselves very lonely and //-233  in despair, the extremely vast and quick benevolence of the world has showed to us its sympathy and understanding.

However, the earth-quake had shown not only the solidarity of the world. From the time being, a blockade of the railway line and roads, banded with the piracy of the sending supplies had become one of the most favorite methods in the neighbor republic, which produce only 4%, comparing with the transit supplies. And once and again the all-Union powers kept their silence and ignored the problem. A blockade meant the de facto demolishing of the Union economic integrity, which was much more substantial, than any political gestures. It had once more exposed, that all-Union government doesn’t take seriously its obligations towards its inner and smaller groups.

So, 1989 was a year of the recovery from the earth-quake, of the refugees and the homeless. Although in July academician A.Sakharov had suggested the confederation concept, due to it the Union and Autonomous Republics should enjoy the equal political rights. In August the congress of the people’s representatives at Karabagh had created the national Council as its omnipotent elected authority. And on September 17, in the conditions of pressing blockade, a session of the Armenian Supreme Soviet was gathered.

It had appealed to the Union Soviet to convene an urgent session with the questions

of the security of Armenian population in a whole area; and especially in the districts, attached to the Mountainous Karabagh;

on the absence of security in the Soviet army;

on a blockade and repayment of damage from the budget of a republic, where this kind of crime was committed.

The Armenian Soviet had referred to the Union one to recognize at its coming session the decision of Mountainous Karabagh and full capacity of its elected representatives. The Armenian Soviet session of September 17 had recognized illegality of the decisions of 1920-21, concerning Armenian rights and their fate.

The completed vision of the national life was presented and institutionalized at the Armenian All-National Movement congress of November 4. The main points of adopted program were: a repudiation from relying on the external forces and need of political independence, otherwise you are deprived from the possibility of representing and protecting your political national interests. For one and a half of a year Armenia was practically departed from the Union system. The all-Union agreement was violated by the central authorities even at the point of physical security. Not a single appeal of the republican Parliament to the Union one had gotten any response, even our proposal to express solidarity in the condemnation of the Armenian genocide, committed in the Ottoman Empire in 1915.

The All-National Movement congress had adopted as the immediate purpose: //-234

1) the reunification of the Autonomous Karabagh with Armenia;

2) the necessity of the new agreement between Armenia and the USSR, including liberty of formation of the republican power institutions; recognition the right to secede; the reconstruction of the national army units, which were dissolved in 1956; the right of the free international economic relations; constitution of the diplomatic relations with foreign countries, and Armenia had such relationship in the early period of the Union history; also the membership in the international organizations;

3) all-Union laws have to be ratified by republican parliament;     

4) new republican constitution should be prepared;

5) economic system must include free enterprising;

6) land is to be transferred to peasants with the right of inheritance;

7) the earth-quake zone must be focus of greatest concern;

8) the state status of Armenian language must be strengthened;

9) church should operate at liberty;

10) refugees and ecology are the problems of prior concern;

11) genocide of Armenian in 1915 ought to be recognized in the United Nations;

12) the Union Supreme Soviet is to recognize unlegitimacy of the Moscow Treaty of March 16, 1921 concerning Nakhijevan, and of the Russian Communist party decision of July 5, 1921, concerning Mountainous Karabagh;

13) revision the cases of the “people’s enemies” after 1920;

14) provision of the complete, fulsome analysis and condemnation of Sumgait;

15) transfer of Armenian prisoners, who carry their penalties around the country in the detention establishments of Armenian republic; and

16) to reconstruct the historical topography.

This program represented the main trends in the national thinking and future political activity. In its turn, the Union Supreme Soviet had issued on November 28 a decision to return Autonomous Karabagh under the domination of Azerbaijan forcefully. It had contained a special point on preservation of the status quo in the region’s demographic composition, but confided no one. As many times before, only punitive points of decision ought to work in the ordinary life. By the given decision Mountainous Karabagh was deprived of elective institutes of power, and the army leadership had been given there the free rein. To react on this kind of politics, both Armenia and Mountainous Karabagh had held a common session on December 1, 1989.

At this joint session the Armenian republic had recognized the fact of the region’s self-determination; its decisions of February 20 and July 12, 1988; August 16 and October 19, 1989. The Armenian republic had reco-//-235  gnized the Autonomous National Council and the fact of reunification. It had extended the rights of Armenian citizenship on the population of Karabagh and had assumed the obligation to protect the compatriots in the attached to the region Armenian districts.

The Armenian Supreme Soviet and the Council of Mountainous Karabagh had drawn attention to the actions of genocide in Shousha, Baku, Kirovabad, pointing out, that they hadn’t gotten an official political or juridical estimation. They had to stress, that Azerbaijan has adopted a constitutional law, which openly talks about the extermination of autonomy. The joint session had not ratified the all-Union Soviet’s decision and addressed to all Soviet republics, and through the channels of the republican Foreign Ministry to the international and European community, to the members of the United Nations.

The Armenian joint legislature noted that it does not recognize the Union Supreme Soviet decision, made after the demarche departure of Armenian delegation from the parliament hall. The December 1 session had not agreed in the meantime with the Union Foreign Ministry protest, concerning the United States Senate Resolution of solidarity with the Mountainous Karabagh, dated November 19, 1989. Once and again, the Soviet mass-media had to tell about mass disapproval, although the text of resolution had not been published in the Union press. The Armenian session had evaluated  the American resolution as a support of the right to the self-determination, not as an involvement in the internal affairs. The Soviet Foreign Ministry’s protest doesn’t reflect the opinion of Armenians and their institutions of power, said a document of the republican Parliament.

January 1990 marked the peak of the actual inter-ethnic war on the borders, with the new explosion of violence in the capital of Azerbaijan. From January 14, the National defense committee of this republic had called for invasion into the region of Karabagh; and in Armenia  an official headquarters for the National salvation had been created. From this day on, till January 18 all Baku was inflamed in pogrom, although the might of state, including military strength, was not acting. And only after the denunciation of the Soviet power and dismissal of Soviet officials in Nakhijevan and other places, when the violence against Armenians in Baku had transformed in the movement for the breaking Soviet power up, the State exposed it’s instrumentality and force.

From the January 20 military forces had begun to deblockade the streets of Baku, that had taken a form of the clashes in the streets of the city. After shooting and human life losses Azerbaijanian capital ought to return under the Soviet control on the next day.

Having no possibility to continue its common retain of silence, the all-Union mass-media began to widespread the human losses in the Army on two republics equally, thus stimulating anti-Armenian moods all around the country, which did knew that the Armenians were the initiators of the Karabagh political process. The situa-//-236  tion was so acute, that the high-ranking army official in Yerevan, Major-General M.Sourkov had to denounce this messages, stating officially that not a single person among army personnel had lost his life in Armenia during the Karabagh Movement.

On the base of the all-Union decision of November 28, 1989, Azerbaijanian republic has adopted on April 21, 1990, an edict on the new administrative division in Mountainous Karabagh, with the aim to alter its demographic composition. From the time being, the administrative power in the Autonomous region remains in the hands of the army officials, who implement an extensive policy of intimidation, terror and obvious violation of human rights, suggesting to people to depart from their land. So, on April 24, 1990, when the whole nation, dispersed around the world, had its consolatory ceremonials of the 75th date of the 1915 Genocide, Karabagh participants of the commemorative meeting had been arrested and put into jails. Under the curfew conditions private telephone commodities were voluntarily switching off and transferred to the army officials; even windows were ordered to be closed during hot summer evenings, when the curfew hours began. People were arresting and putting into prisons without any court decision or accuses. Airplane flights from Armenia, being the only link for autonomous region with the external world, were interdicted or limited. And although the November 28 decision contained some positive aspects on the paper, in a reality only its oppressive points were called into the life.

After elections of May 20, June 3 and July 15; the August of 1990 had brought an electoral victory to the Armenian All-National Movement with around 60% of the Supreme Soviet seats. However, the Armenian Communist party members were simultaneously represented in the high legislature, by the percentage of more than 70. After the adoption of the National sovereignty declaration in August 23, the number of laws had been introduced and adopted by Parliament, including the Property Law of October 31. The latter document has proclaimed an equality, full legitimacy and a state protection for the state, cooperative and private property, including the property of international organizations and foreign citizens.

On September 9-29, 1990, a group of Armenian deputies in the Union parliament went on the hunger-strike during the Supreme Soviet session, thus protesting in the unprecedented for the country’s people deputies’ form against the severe official and unofficial terror in the Autonomous region. The group of high intellectual-deputies, with the 82 years old prominent scientist Victor H. Hambartsoumian in its consistency, had protested against the practical dissemination of the Autonomous administrative structure and had demanded to restore democratic, elective Soviet power institutions in the Mountainous Karabagh.

The contemporary political thinking of Armenians, accumulated and reflected in the Sovereignty declaration, recognizes the political independence as a legitimate and normal trend, as an expecting result of the intentional process, although it was just the central power proper policy, which has brought the political ethnic ideas //-237  to the ultimate inquest of separation from the Union state. So, the disposition of the smaller republics to sing new agreement will depend upon its real terms, although three years experience of the Karabagh Movement had been exposing the reality, that the state is not intended to respect the major liberties and unalienable rights of its smaller groups.

Radicalization of peoples is immediately connected with the apparent intention of state rather to reject national problems, than respectfully deal with them. It’s a result of the discrimination with the gap between democratic slogans of reconstruction in the USSR, its positive foreign policy, and its oppressive respond to the internal needs of nations.

Political independence is frequently represented as an antagonistic to the process of economical integration. In the bipolar system, however, it makes such an integration more reasonable and profitable for the smaller groups. In the contemporary integrative approach the central power of the Soviet Union suggests, that cooperation must be developed exclusively on the base of immediate subordination instead of mutual interdependence of the industrial specialization. The all-Union government replaces the mutual profits and benefits by the direct political-administrative subordination, although in the contemporary political structures it’s next to impossible to induce central government to adjust national questions through political bargaining. Disproportion of power between numerically big an small is so huge, possibilities to express the interests of the smaller nationalities are so limited, that central powers simply neglect a necessity to respect ethnic individualities in their practical politics. And what depends on composing of the most progressive documents, only paper material doesn’t seem to enjoy much credit.

So, what is the Armenian Supreme Soviet perception of the strategy of political communication? We assent that endurance and implementation of violence contains a real danger of the destruction for the numerically diminutive peoples, although, any way, it does not and will not present any positive prospects. The implementation of exclusively nonviolent instruments in the inter-relationship represents sine qua non for survival of the massive countries and humanity as a whole. Creation of new relationship in the proficient Soviet Union may be possible not on the slogans of reunification as an aim in itself, but rather on the proposal of cooperation in the not debated spheres, to begin, for example, with ecology. And only after the solid base of the real partnership is achieved, it is possible to transmit towards more complicated and debatable points of discussion. //-238