ARF DASHNAKTSOUTIUN ROAD-MAP
Jean Ipdjian
Gibrahayer
Oct 29, 2009
A few days ago, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation Dashnaktsoutiun
(ARF) unveiled its own ‘road map to regime change’, a detailed plan for
changes required in the socio-economic, political, and governmental
structures of the country. Armen Rustamian, the chairman of the ARF
Supreme Council of Armenia in a press conference introduced the plan.
It is only natural that a political party or organisation would aspire
to the government of the country, and more so a party or organisation
with a history such as the ARF, with a power base as vast as the
ARF specially in the Diaspora and who has had a history in country
governance albeit nearly a century ago.
It is also strange that governance has not been one of its stated aims
since independence nor has it governed her policies and behaviour. This
has been both her strength and weakness. It has been her strength,
because any, and all actions the ARF has undertaken has been guided
by its desire to keep balances, to ensure that National aims and
aspiration were kept in the forefront of the day’s governors.
It has been her strength, because thus, the ARF has participated and
played a major role in the difficult work of rebuilding and recreating
a country ravished by the effects of decades of a defunct and unjust
regime, of an economy devastated by the greed of unscrupulous remnants
of the old guard and their present-day successors.
And it has been its weakness because while being in government the
ARF has had to share in the effects of all the unpopular decision
and in the failures of the men in power, while she has ha d no say
in those decisions.
It had been its weakness, because people like to be identified
with those in power and those who are wielding power, especially in
countries like Armenia where democratic traditions are non-existent
or at their infancy.
Finally, it has been its weakness, because it had elected, making
a conscious choice, to concentrate its strength and endeavour in
country-building and nation-rebuilding.
It seems that the strategy practised by the ARF regarding the
governance of Armenia, the strategy of guidance and concentration on
specific crisis areas such as the rebuilding of the Disaster Zone
and the reinvigoration of the agriculture, has not worked and has
been taken as a sign of incapability to act by those near and around
the government.
The signing of the Protocols in their present form seems to have been
the last straw. However, as in the recent past regime change now as
well has not meant for the ARF a simple change in the government or of
the President. As stressed by Mr. Rustamian and as prescribed in the
document, it has meant a general restructuring of the socio-economic
situation, a redefinition of the strategic goals and the restructuring
of the state in such a way as to reflect the ambitions and aspirations
of the general population and not the chosen few.
The ARF has never shied away from responsibilities. At the beginning of
the last century, just after the Genocide when Eastern, present Armenia
also was under threat of being usurped by Turkey following the breakup
of Tsarist Russian rule in the Caucasus it stepped forward and nearly
singlehandedly formed a government and declared independence thus
putting the seeds of the Republic of Armenia of today. Earlier during
soviet rule, again nearly singlehandedly, with dogged determination,
and against all the odds it pursued the question of the recognition
of the Genocide by world governments. And singlehandedly kept alive in
the minds and souls of the Armenian nation the notion of independence,
for which we now are called again to struggle.
Admittedly, the ARF does not have the technical means to bring to
head such a plan. Its representation in the Parliament is small.
But it has what no amount of money, no amount of threats, no amount
of bought or cajoled votes can buy. It has the moral authority, it
has the courage and it has the determination required to embark on
such a quest.