The Thin Line Between Peace and Justice: Madrid or Munich?

It has been almost two years since the future was restored in Armenia. Nikol Pashinyan and the thousands who peacefully took to the streets in the early spring of 2018 should forever be remembered as the restorers of hope in Armenia. It is the essential ingredient for progress. But now PM Pashinyan is the head of the government and governing is a different process. When the prior administration was replaced and free elections were held, the My Step alliance won a significant majority. In fact, one could say it was enough of a majority to control the passage of virtually all legislation. As soon as the honeymoon period was over (inevitable for all leaders regardless of the circumstances of their ascension), there were cries that Armenia still lacked a viable opposition. What did you expect in the short term from the electorate? They rewarded the alliance that gave them a reason to get up in the morning and begin dreaming again. They were honored for their courage and effectiveness as a revolutionary movement, not as a government. The formation of an “opposition” in a free and fair environment is a natural succession event once some level of dissatisfaction exists with the former revolutionaries. As more diverse views evolve, the governing alliance will have to earn continued power based on results as an administration and not as revolutionaries. It is also inevitable that additional political parties will emerge. This is a natural result of political maturation. It’s good for Armenia. This government has inherited an overwhelming number of economic, social and national security issues. We need to judge their efforts in that context. There is no question the environment has improved. But time will tell whether the rate of change meets the satisfaction level of the electorate. It is a tough job in a tough neighborhood.

Of particular interest, in the plethora of issues they are grappling with, are foreign policy and national security. Frankly, this is the area that the diaspora seems to be most interested in because of the implications on the world stage, the future of Artsakh and the unresolved issues with the Genocide. Domestic policy has the most impact on daily lives, but given the victim psyche of our people, Artsakh and the Genocide are vehicles of redemption. For the last 11 to 12 years, Armenia has been saddled on the Artsakh settlement with a defensive posture based on the tacit “agreement” of the Madrid Principles. The six principles, which have been the foundation of the OSCE Minsk Group negotiations, are  unacceptable to most Armenians. The Armenians were victimized by the deceit of Stalin in 1923, oppression under Azerbaijan, futile attempts for peaceful reunification with Armenia and a vicious offensive war initiated by the Azeris. Confronted with a second genocide, the Armenians defended their land and expelled the Azeri invaders. After establishing a functioning democracy and market economy (despite blockades and being politically unrecognized), it is clear why the Armenians remain opposed and wary of the Madrid Principles. They view it as regressive and ignoring the issues they resolved with their sacrifices (refugees, referendum, political status). It understates the events of the last 30 years and attempts to “restart the clock” to 1988. It also puts the Armenians in a dangerous dependency on foreign troops for security versus border solutions.