Levon Ter Petrossian says he is ready to work with President Sargsyan

A farewell speech or a proposal to cooperate?

He considers irredentism to be the creed of a stateless nation

by Tatul Hakobyan

Published: Friday November 20, 2009

Yerevan, February 26, 2008: Levon Ter-Petrossian, left, who disputed his defeat at the presidential polls, suggested at a Yerevan rally that President Elect Serge Sargsyan, right, should resign and leave the country. The president elect, at a rally elsewhere in Yerevan, appealed to all the former presidential candidates to join in a coalition government. Most agreed in the name of national unity. Photolure

Yerevan - During a meeting of the leadership of the opposition Armenian National Congress (HAK) on November 11, Armenia's first president, Levon Ter-Petrossian delivered a lengthy speech in which he announced that he was ready to recognize the legitimacy of the president of the republic. It was the first time in two years that Mr. Ter-Petrossian did not label the president a "kleptocrat," and the country a khanate, a kleptocracy, a Mongol­-Tatar state.

On the contrary, Mr. Ter-Petrossian very strongly criticized the president's critics - thus indirectly expressing his support for the president. Mr. Ter-Petrossian's target was the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF), former President Robert Kocharian, and former Foreign Minister Vartan ­Oskanian. Mr. Ter-Petrossian did have criticize the president, but his criticism was more in the nature of an offer of cooperation.

The leaders of the ARF quickly responded with some sarcasm that Mr. Ter-Petrossian's speech was more a commercial proffer than a political offer. The first president appeared to be offerring a deal to the Armenian authorities, proposing no longer to question the president's legitimacy.

Other leading figures within the opposition congress, Stepan Demirchian and Aram Karapetian, have so far made no public comment about Mr. Ter-Petrossian's extraordinary speech.

During one of his rallies this past spring, Mr. Ter-Petrossian had said that the country was in such bad economic straits that the authorities would soon propose cooperating with HAK and at that time HAK would decide whether or not to cooperate with them. The statement was not especially well received by the people at the rally.

In reality, Armenia's economic situation deteriorated monthly, but the authorities apparently did not ask for Mr. Ter-Petrossian's help. And why would they? Mr. Ter-Petrossian's support had crumbled, whereas Mr. Sargsyan had gained strength.

Aspiring to come to power is a natural phenomenon in politics, but if in the name of "national objectives," Mr. Ter-Petrossian was ready to cooperate with Mr. Sargsyan, then he could have made such a proposal prior to March 1, 2008, when blood had not been spilled in the center of Yerevan and 10 Armenians had not been killed.

After the 2008 presidential elections, at a rally on February 26 in Yerevan's Republic Square, Mr. Sargsyan said: "Here, from this podium I am appealing to the former candidates and those that supported them. Let's cooperate, all the way up to forming a coalition government. The objective is one - utilize all the constructive, fundamental powers to work for the development of Armenia."

Mr. Sargsyan plainly, publicly, and honestly said very clearly to Mr. Ter-Petrossian that he was ready to share power with him. At that time, however, Mr. Ter-Petrossian imagined that he was close to victory and he did he want to hear anything about dialogue.

That same day, at the same hour in Freedom Square, protest rallies contesting the results of the presidential elections were continuing. There, Mr. Ter-Petrossian said: "There are at least a half-million people standing here. I am appealing to you, even in an amicable manner: Robert, Serge, come to your senses, understand what is taking place in this country. Have courage. You don't have to walk among the people. The Opera has a back entrance; you can come through there. We will even lay a red carpet before you all the way to this microphone, and then hand in your resignations and leave this country." [During and after the campaign, Mr. Ter-Petrossian encouraged the view that Mr. Kocharian and Mr. Sargsyan, as Karabakh-Armenians, were aliens.]

From Republic Square the same day at the same hour, Mr. Sargsyan was saying: "The authorities are ready to cooperate with all opposition forces in the name of Armenia's development and for the welfare of Armenia's people. At the same time, with great responsibility I am announcing, that the most resolute steps will be taken in our country to strengthen political stability, to restore and protect public order and the normal activities of society."

And then the bloody events of March 1 came to pass.

Several political parties, including those that had their own presidential candidates - the Country of Laws and the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (for a year) - joined Mr. Sargsyan's coalition. Mr. Ter-Petrossian and his supporters labeled these parties and all those who recognized Mr. Sargsyan's legitimacy, with the most insulting words, some of which had nothing to do with politics.

And now a passage from Mr. Ter-Petrossian's November 11 speech:

"With regard to Armenia-Turkey relations and the resolution of the Karabakh conflict, Serge Sargsyan has gone to unnecessary concessions, with the objective of obtaining legitimacy from foreigners. Instead of debasing himself so, what was barring him from asking for that desired legitimacy from his own people and not being forced to agree to such concessions? In the 17th century, there was a greedy and power-hungry clergyman in Turkey by the name of Yeghiazar Ayntaptsi, who through bribery and cheating had been able to become the Catholicos of the Turkish­-Armenians, placing the unity of the Armenian Church and the Armenian people in grave danger. At that time, the brotherhood in Etchmiadzin convened a meeting and appealing to him, saying, ‘Brother, you want to be Catholicos, come and become the Catholicos of All Armenians; just don't bring calamity to our people and don't destroy our church.' Yeghiazar agreed and for 10 years (1681-91) became the Catholicos of All Armenians in the Mother See of Etchmiadzin and in that way the tragedy that was threatening the Armenian Church was averted. In all of Armenia's history, I do not know of any other more broadminded and wise expression in our national mentality than that decision of the brotherhood of Etchmiadzin."

Send to a friend

To (e-mail address):


Your Name:


Message:


Printer-Friendly Single Page

View Comments (2)
  • READ ALL COMMENTS
  • POST A COMMENT
Different types of support

The previous comment raises a valid question. I think Tatul Hakobyan's point becomes clear toward the end of the article, where he writes: "It is now clear to everyone that Mr. Ter-Petrossian no longer has serious support among the people, whereas the president, thanks to the Armenia-Turkey process, has been able to secure serious support from the international community."

By vincent.lima at November 21, 2009

An interesting claim

The gracious reporter of this article wrote: "Mr. Ter-Petrossian's support had crumbled, whereas Mr. Sargsyan had gained strength." Clearly, the first half of the clause is true, as anyone who has personally observed the "meetings" of HAK over the past year have seen. But is there an analogous way of measuring Sargsyan's support? Could it be by voting? Clearly not, since it is well known how poorly vote results correspond to political leanings of the people - not to mention how poorly vote results in Armenia reflect actual ballots cast. But there is enough literature on election fraud in Armenia... Is it by meetings in Yerevan? When has Serge had a meeting over the past year? Even the post-election "meeting" he held (referenced in this article) was a disaster for him, considering the people that he forcibly bussed to Republic Square to cheer for him subsequently and immediately hooffed it to the Opera to join Levon's protest. So, it Serge's support is not from meetings, since he hasn't organized one "meeting" after that ill-fated inauguration event. Is it by referendum? But, Yerevan hasn't had a referendum to express how much they like (or dislike) Serge. In fact, the government didn't even hold a referendum to see what the people thought about the Protocols. But, maybe there's a good reason for that, which would again fall under the category of "election fraud." In any case, I guess it's best that the oligarchs saved their bribe money for more important (to them) votes. Is it by meetings in the Diaspora, somehow? The only thing Serge's diasporan tour accomplished was to give the opportunity to maddened diasporans to vent their rage personally on Serge for his enormous capitulations in the Protocols. So Sarksyan's popularity certainly can't be gauged through the Diaspora. So how does this gracious reporter gauge Serge's support? I would love to know. I hope it's not just a blind assertion designed to fool us diasporans into believing that the president who fraudulently rose to power has won the hearts of the people through his misguided and naive foreign diplomacy. That would be ... well, just pitiful.

By at November 21, 2009

Please register to comment on this article

Already a user?


Rep. Howard Berman chairing committee meeting. Armenian Reporter.

Genocide resolution gets March 4 committee vote

House of Representatives' Foreign Affairs Committee announces plans to mark up the resolution nearly a year after its introduction and amid deadlock in Armenia-Turkey process.