DR. HAYK KOTANJIAN, PRESIDENT, POLITICAL SCIENCE ASSOCIATION OF ARMENIA, "INCUMBENT AND FIRST PRESIDENTS OF ARMENIA PREFER CHESS IN POLITICS" - Mr. Kotanjian, You became the first Armenian Doctor of Political Sciences since Perestroika in the USSR/RF Academic Supreme Qualification Council adopted the new specialization "Political Processes and Institutions", you also held important fellowships in prominent European and American centers focused on defense and security issues. Could you tell us about the newly registered Political Science Association of Armenia (PSAA) and your role in the organization? - The founders of the Association include many of the leading political scientists in Armenia, who mainly have vast experience of cooperation with many distinguished political science schools of Russia, America and Europe. My colleagues, mainly young specialists, are interested in clearly separating the professional environment of political science from activities of amateur political commentators. Based on these principles, the main goals of the organization mentioned in its Charter are: to facilitate the formation of academic foundations and traditions of Armenian political science, to support relevant education and training processes, to create corresponding professional and ethical norms and to establish effective cooperation with relevant organizations abroad. I am the President of the organization, presiding over meetings of the Association’s Board, if we speak in American terms, I am the Chairman of the Board. The Executive Director of the organization is Benjamin Poghosyan, the young PhD holder, a graduate of the US Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. - Levon Ter-Petrosyan, the leader of the Armenian National Congress, declared at their last rally that in its activities the Congress would do its best to prevent domestic instability in Armenia for not giving Azerbaijan a chance to resume hostilities. How could you evaluate that statement as a political scientist and as a President of PSAA? - Ter-Petrosyan’s statement is relevant to the distinguished position and public stature of the First President of Armenia. It reflects the possibility to build consensus between governing and opposition elites based on the undisputable priority of national security interests of Armenia, Karabakh and Diaspora. - How would you assess Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s activities in the past? - As an ambiguous one! The First President’s merits in the process of the formation of independent Armenia’s statehood are undisputable. During his term, in close cooperation with Karabakh national liberation movement leaders Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan, the political victory of holding the significant legal referendum in Karabakh and the formation of Nagorno Karabakh Republic was achieved. The formation of the Armenian Armed Forces and the military victory in Karabakh also took place during his tenure. Meanwhile, it is also important to mention the many serious mistakes in the national state building process which created the basis for the current economic social and political challenges and shortcomings in Armenia and Karabakh. Despite all of the shortcomings in Soviet doctrinal limitations, Armenia held leading positions in some sectors of electronic and precise engineering industry, well integrated within the USSR defense industry system. The social structure of the Armenian society was relevant to its advanced economy. In the 1980s, Armenia held leading positions among the Soviet republics in terms of the number of PhD holders per 1000 person. During the First President’s tenure, who, in parallel with young professionals, brought into the state institutions also a group of many criminal populists, as a result of some grave mistakes during the social and economic reforms Armenia was eventually transformed into the state with virtually no R&D and precise machinery sector. We should certainly also mention some objective reasons which caused such a serious decline of industrial output in all of the post-Soviet states: the collapse and disruption of the supply chain, the end of Moscow’s subsidiary support, low competitiveness of some sectors in industry due to insufficient levels of computerization and modernization in the 1980s. Nevertheless, shortcomings in the strategy and tactics of privatization, and also the freezing of contacts with partners carried out tactically not in appropriate time with former Soviet republics played an important role in the process of demolition of the high-tech industry and severely undermined the national security resources. The access to privatization was granted to random individuals who were mainly interested to sell off the industrial assets as scrap metal, rather than any type of strategic investment. Another serious mistake during the privatization process was committed in the agriculture sector, which resulted in the ineffective division of land and mechanization with a further degradation of the national agricultural economy. These processes worsened as a result of the hostilities launched by Azerbaijan in Karabakh and along the Armenia-Azerbaijan borders and by its efforts to impose a trade and transport blockade of Armenia and Karabakh. I believe that one of the most evident mistakes in the policy of the All-Armenian National Movement (ANM) concerned the establishment and keeping balanced dialogue with influential parties and groups of interest both in Armenia and Diaspora. The persecution of the ARF (Dashnaktsutiun) and arrest of its leaders, attempts to weaken another influential political organization in the Diaspora- namely, the Liberal Democratic (Ramgavar-Azadakan) party, and other such steps in the process of the formation of statehood inserted a pronounced confrontation-prone mindset in the relations of the main political actors in both Armenia and the Diaspora. - What are your thoughts about the roots of the high degree of social tension within Armenian society? - Upon gaining the independence, the defense engineering and industry-oriented economy of Armenia inherited from the USSR was not duly reoriented toward cooperation with the countries of the neighboring Middle Eastern Region, which was, and currently serves as a market for the modernized products of the Russian defense industry – the inheritor of the vast defense-industrial complex of the Soviet Union. The Armenian scientific-technical community, which was a part of a larger plundered system of precise machinery engineering, was also significantly weakened in that period. The demise of the industrial capacity of Soviet Armenia was a result of professional incompetence of state leadership and management, and abuse and corruption in the authority structures - under the cover of the populist imitation of democracy, became reasons for mass unemployment, a catastrophic transformation of social-professional structure and the polarization of Armenian society. That also led to a labor migration of a broad class of professionals, the monopolization and oligarchization of the business sector, and difficulties in planning for sustainable economic development, as well as education-training and employment opportunities for the professionals. Such mistakes and abuse in the past and present ultimately conditioned the social tensions within the Armenian society. - What is your attitude towards the recent hunger strike of the Heritage party leader Raffi Hovhannisian? - Raffi is one of the well-educated and patriotic representatives of the Armenian Diaspora, who preferred the risks of political involvement in Armenia over the predictable professional career in the US. With that said, it needs to be mentioned the non-confrontational and civilized nature of Raffi Hovhannisian’s political act. That move corresponds to the system of international norms in the field of civic and political human rights, rights and liberties, reflected in the Constitution of our nation-state. To me, as a political scientist, there is no reason for contestation of his choice of non-violent methods of political struggle for furthering democracy and progress in Armenia. - What would you say about the invitation of Levon Ter-Petrosyan to play chess in the politics? - Understandably, it was a figural expression of the caliber of political preferences. Here, I think, it is appropriate to recall the politically impeccable aphorism of one of the leading figures of the contemporary political strategy, Sir Winston Churchill – "Statesmen are concerned with the fate of the next generation, while politicians are concerned with the next elections" The important thing for the given situation is that both the government and the opposition – in particular the former president and the incumbent, each separately stressed the coincidence of one of the strategic interests of their respective activities – the priority of the continuation of the political struggle without undermining the domestic stability of Armenia as one of the main priorities of our national security. In that sense, the chess in the politics for each leader symbolizes the priority of the strategy in the long term national interest vis-à-vis the tactics and conjuncture of politicking. From the perspective of enriching of our national political culture, and having in view the outlines of dialogue among the participants of the political process as one of the strategic priorities of national security, we can see the feasibility of legalization of playing particularly important and honored roles by former presidents in the political life of the Republic of Armenia– with the creative reviewing and incorporation of the positive experience of many states. - How would you characterize the invitation of the President of Armenia for a dialogue among those who are responsible for the national security? - As a strategic goal, which reflects the priorities of the provision of national security of our state, the following fundamental principle "Armenia cannot afford to lose any war" could be taken as an invitation for national dialogue and consolidation. This principle unites all of the Armenians throughout the world and gains particular urgency in connection with the aggressive threats from Azerbaijan to resume war, on the eve of the 100-year anniversary of the tragic Armenian Genocide, in which in line with the Ottoman Empire, a designated role was played by self-proclaimed Azerbaijan in 1918. That security principle of a national caliber can serve as the foundation for achieving a strategic consensus in the network consolidation of the integrative strength of Armenia, Nagorno-Karabakh and the Diaspora. | 
