21.02.2006Gagik Harutyunyan’s interview given to mass media
In the interview given to mass media by Noravank Foundation’s director Gagik Harutyunyan were discussed the possible motives and political-economic after-effects of Russia-South Caucasus pipeline and high voltage power lines bursts. In the framework of the event’s analytical version the author spoke about the resent “espionage scandal” in the context of relations between British intelligence and especially the “Eurasia” Foundation. It was casually reminded that the given foundation has a branch in Armenia as well. The Eurasian Foundation’s Armenian branch has come out with some comments on the above mentioned material one of these days.
-Mr. Harutyunyan, if such a tough reaction of “Eurasian” Foundation’s Armenian office to the mentioned publication was adequate to the ideas and standpoints expressed by you in the interview.
-In the interview were discussed the bursts of Russia-South Caucasus pipeline and high voltage power lines, the possible motives and political-economic consequences of these actions. As an analytical version were reviewed and compared “British intelligence’s track” in these bursts and the Russian counter intelligence’s return actions. A special attention was paid on the fact that the following day after the bursts a documentary TV program was released by Russian television about the ties of British espionage net in Moscow, particularly with “Eurasia” Foundation. It was also pointed out that this foundation has its branch in Armenia as well. The information about “Eurasia” Foundation’s closure in Russia and the establishment of “New Eurasia” Foundation instead of it was a technical inaccuracy. Indeed, “Eurasia” still carries out activities in Russia, yet according to Russian information sources this foundation has established the “New Eurasia” Foundation together with multi-millionaire and “revolutionist” George Soros, which will work in parallel with “Eurasia”.
As for the reaction of the Armenian branch of “Eurasia”, I wouldn’t formulate it as tough. In the given circumstances we deal with tactless reaction where stress is not put on facts but labels incompatible with norms of civilized information activities are slicked. The Armenian branch’s stile of press release reminds Stalin’s epoch “ITAR-TASS report” when ITAR-TASS was “empowered to announce” about the neutralization of “internal” and “external” enemies. It is worth mentioning that both the British officials and the representatives of “Eurasia” office in Moscow reacted to the accusations by the Russian FSB, addressed directly to them, more then correctly. It is natural, as the staff members of different special services all over the world are periodically “uncovered”, and it’s a long time since all these have become a part of international practice. In this aspect “espionage scandal” in Moscow is not an exception and a very emotional reaction of press cutting service’s official of “Eurasia’s” Armenian branch has come to prove about its amateurism.
I want to repeat that in the interview there is no word about Armenian branch’s espionage activities. Indeed, we can notice that in the web page of FSB, where is commented British “espionage” scandal, is presented a document with a stamp of Armenian branch of “Eurasia”; here is spoken about some activities devoted to the foundation’s tenth anniversary. Only FSB officers may answer the question what was the aim and logic of this very document to appear on the FSB web page. As for me, I’m not inclined to interpret this fact as “an Armenian track” of “espionage scandal” as some people qualify it in Armenian information field. However it is not unlikely that the appearance of this very document’s on FSB’s web site caused tactless reaction of personnel of the Armenian branch of “Eurasia”.
-In your opinion what is the reason of such a tough attitude by an organization one of the main goals of which is considered to be dissemination of dissidence, freedom of speech and principals of democracy?
-I wouldn’t like to make any generalization, but there is an impression that some non-governmental organizations (NGO) financed from outside are in reality far from the ideas declared by themselves common to all mankind. In his time, making use of formal opportunities provided by democracy a man called Adolph Hitler came to power. One can find a great variety of materials in information field that some non-governmental organizations took part in “revolutionary” processes in Ukraine, Georgia, Kirgizia and Uzbekistan and were generously paid for it. Moreover, they say that some non-governmental organizations carried out actions more peculiar to special services then democratic structures. A number of NGOs are financed by Russian oligarchs Berezovski and George Soros, who are under examination at present; the letter one is not accepted unambiguously by many people. It’s worth mentioning that the regional organization of “New Eurasia” Foundation working in Russia is established as a result of an agreement reached between the leaders of “Eurasia” and George Soros. According to the members of Center for geopolitical studies of Аdvisory council on national security issues under the State Duma of Russian Federation Igor Dobayev and Alexander Dugin “New Eurasia” programs’ goal is to carry out revolution in Russia.
A little digressing from the subject of our conversation I want to stress up that such revolutions disrupt natural course of historical developments and often turn into tragedy for countries and nations. We have got “the striking” example of revolution in1917 which made a system of destruction of millions of its citizens. According to me, there are such negative tendencies in Georgia and Ukraine. Let’s notice that the technologies used in up-to-date “color revolutions” are practically identical with the ones used by Lenin and Parvus and by Trotsky and Radek in early Stalinian period. These revolutions had and have clear-cut geopolitical and geoideological tasks and have nothing common with values common to all mankind.
As for NGOs, let’s mark that in the context of above mentioned, in our society there is a tendency of reducing rating of some NGOs funded from outside. The activities carried by then are not quite adequate to the size of accepted grants and having an imitating character have often become a subject of discussion in Armenian TV and press. These tendencies must first of all be a matter of concern for NGOs.
-Mr. Harutyunyan, following the recent revolutionary processes one can notice that some non-governmental organizations even don’t try to hide, that they have somehow fostered the carrying out of “color revolutions”. What is it conditioned by?
-In 1930s the figures of the same Comintern didn’t hide that they aim at carrying out world revolution. But I think that such “frankness” doesn’t mean that they were pursuing noble objects. It goes without saying that everybody has a right to protect his principles and ideology. Yet, when ideological tenets are introduced into society by methods inherent to special services, that’s to say, illegally, it is unacceptable for a healthy society.
Return