HISTORY OR PROPAGANDA?: HIGH SCHOOL TEXTBOOK GIVE ONE-SOURCE ACCOUNT OF 03/01 EVENTS
By GAYANE ABRAHAMYAN
ArmeniaNow
27.11.12 | 15:14
The new history book for university students has become a target of
sharp criticism having opened the yet unhealed wounds of the March 1,
2008 tragedy. Critics claim the events in it are “wickedly distorted”,
presented with “strictly subjective interpretations”.
The university textbook published by the Yerevan State University’s
history chair and authored by its 14 history professors appeared in the
focus of attention because of its account in Chapter Four describing
the post-election clashes between the opposition and law-enforcement
bodies creating an impression as if the opposition is at fault for
sparking the conflict and the 10 deaths.
This section, authored by Dean of YSU History Faculty Edik Minasyan,
reads in part: “Rudely refusing to accept the election results,
the radical wing of the opposition, with lack of any restraint from
the authorities, outrageously broke the provisions of the law and on
February 20 started the sequence of rallies in Yerevan”. It further
says that “during ten days the unauthorized opposition rallies
ultimately destabilized the situation in the entire country.”
The author describes Armenia’s first president Levon Ter-Petrosyan
and opposition leader as “having adopted radical work style”, saying
“his supporters ignored the appeals” of artists, intellectuals and
the Catholicos of All-Armenians and “skilfully took advantage of the
situation”. He further gives assessments and comments, claiming that
“the worst post-election developments” had been pre-planned during
the campaign.
Moreover, Minasyan seems to be citing the police statement when he
moves on to the recount of the tragedy that unfolded early morning of
March 1 at Liberty Square, describing the police actions as “measures
to establish public order” to which “the organisers and participants of
mass disorder responded with violence, using iron bars, wooden sticks,
stones”. He terms the late afternoon and night events in the square
facing the municipality as “havoc and looting”, that “the ralliers
assaulted the police”, and that “both sides resorted to firearms,
which left two police officers and eight civilians dead”.
The Fact Finding Group (formed to investigate the incident) submitted
extensive material proving that the looting and the assaults were
instigated and implemented by sabotage groups placed among the
protestors, and at Liberty Square it was the demonstrators peacefully
sleeping in tents who were assaulted by the police and brutally
beaten. Nonetheless, Minasyan claims the source he used while writing
that section was the investigation results and report of the National
Assembly temporary commission studying the events.
“Whatever is written is fact-based on the Commission’s investigation,
documents, and this improper clamour makes no sense,” Minasyan told
ArmeniaNow.
What “makes no sense” to the critics is why the pages of history have
been written and submitted as a high school textbook – often regarded
as the only truth – using only one source of reference.
“It’s not a history textbook, but direct recreation of Haylur [Armenian
first public TV news bulletin] coverage of those days. A historian
simply has no right to write even one fragment of history using only
one source, and even more so when writing modern history, considering
the abundance and diversity of available sources,” Minas Sargsyan,
historian and expert in international relations, told ArmeniaNow.
The book has been approved by the Ministry of Science and Education
as high school textbook. Deputy director of National Institute of
Education Anahit Bakhshyan, former Heritage MP who was in the heart of
March 1-2 events, says the ministry had no right to approve a manual
with such outstanding shortcomings.
“This demonstrates that the control commissions aren’t functioning,
but carrying out orders. It is a disgrace, when history books are
distorted, presenting a one-sided recount as dictated by the current
authorities. I witnessed it all myself and that text is an apparent
political order,” she told ArmeniaNow.
Karen Khachatryan, deputy director of History Institute at the National
Academy of Sciences, told ArmeniaNow that the history of that period
of time cannot be “presented objectively until archive documents are
de-classified” and that it is every historian’s duty to use various
sources and present reality “if not objectively, at least positively”.
Co-author of the controversial textbook, content editor Petros
Hovhannisyan says with irony that the “chapter has been criticised
also by the authorities, which means it is fairly comprehensive”.
Nonetheless, the publication of this textbook has raised a new wave
of anger among the parents of the March-1 victims.
Tigran Khachatryan’s mother Alla Honhannisyan says “such distortion
has to be boycotted and refuted”.
“It is said there that both sides used firearms which led to ten
deaths. How come there is isn’t a single word saying that three
people got killed by Cheryomukha-7 used by the police – this is a
fact recorded in the parliamentary commission report, why has it
been ignored? My daughter will soon be a university student. Should
she, who has been cherishing the memories of the brother she has
lost, feel ashamed when the textbook presents him as a robber and
looter?” says the woman. “Once again they have dishonored the memory
of our children.”