• am
  • ru
  • en
print version
24.01.2008

ON RA SECURITY ISSUES

   

Gagik Ter-Harutyunyan

Emblem (original) Discussing the Republic’s attainments of the previous year, the analytical community attaches special importance to drawing up of the “RA National security strategy” fundamental document. At the very end of 2007 was also ratified the “RA military doctrine.” Thus, one may state as a fact that at present there are two conceptions with the force of the law in the republic, which are called to become a milestone in the processes of ensuring security of Armenia and Armenians. At the same time, it is not a secret (and first of all for the ones who have initiated the creation of these documents) that the RA National Security Strategy and Military doctrine have a considerable declarative character and haven’t turned into a real mechanism dictating the Republic’s home and foreign policy.

Democratic system caused problems

The difficulties connected with transferring theoretical provisions to the sphere of their practical application today are conditioned by a number of factors. The analytical community stresses up lack of preparedness of the state machinery personnel and the fact that, as a matter of fact, the structures of our ministries are not adapted to carrying out such kind of activities. In separate circles of political elite one may sometimes hear that our “state” or “authority” are not homogeneous concepts and that separate state departments have objectionable specificity, besides they are overpersonalized, which doesn’t contribute to working and carrying out of a united policy pursuing our national interests.

Of course, our state system is brought in conformity with acceptable democratic norms and standards and their equilibrium: the latter one should prevent the creation of a dominating power in the state, which is considered as an authoritative regime establishing precondition. At the same time, along with its advantages, such a system can’t but hinder the formation of the center of political will and partially limits the possibility of making operative decisions.

There are some difficulties between authority-society relations. In particular, the concepts of “middle class” and “civil society” are quite obscure and arguable for the Armenian society. From the first concept also seems to be urged the necessity of forming “lower” and “higher” classes. In its turn, the concept on “civil society” particularly supposes high level of the society’s “autonomy” in the state system and even “separate state” functions. So, let’s mention that according to most of the international experts, the weakening of “state-society” relations is not in the least the most optimal vision of organizing a society.

However, the above mentioned does not at all mean that the democratic system of organizing the state and society excludes formation of the center of national-political will, without which it is impossible to have a strong state and society.

Most of the powerful states today are succeeding in the framework of democratic norms throughout quite a long historical period, and some other seemingly super-powerful non-democratic power states are collapsing as a result of the very first internal blows. Of course, the complex discussion of this problem is sure to observe the example of countries (Iran, Israel, Belarus etc.) adhering to so called “third path.” Yet, let’s turn to our problems.

On institutional structures

In the democratic system the problems of disunion of the state from different society levels are as a rule smoothed away with the help of so called institutional structures (IS), the main objective of which is formation of complex integrity. In this context one may state as a fact that the role of IS in our Republic is not that high.

The Armenian Apostolic Church continues its functions as the IS traditional and pen-Armenian structure (which should also include the ideological sphere in its activities). As a result of Artsakh liberation straggle, the Defense Ministry has acquired a special institutional significance: no wonder that the document on the RA National Security Strategy was drawn up in the Defense Ministry. In the political, national-ideological spheres only RPA (Republican Party of Armenia) and ARP (Armenian Revolutionary Party) have a chance to become instututional structures. The society was also inspired by the promise made by authorities to establish a ministry engaged in Diaspora problems, which will provide a chance to take up organization and security problems of Armenians all over the world.

One should not forget about losses as well, among which the first place is taken by the Nation Academy of Science (NAS): today the NAN is in a very difficult condition as it doesn’t carry out its more than important (from the standpoint of national security) function of scientific-technological center and mainly tries to solve the task of its own existence.

At the same time it is worth mentioning that in the analytical society there is a prevailing opinion that strengthening of the role of separate ISs or increasing their number will hardly improve the condition in the field of state and society organization. Non-official palls among state and political elite have come to prove that the solution of the above mentioned problems is probably possible only in case when in the republic will begin functioning Council of National Security (CNS) as a full-value consulting-analytical structure. The international experience has shown that such bodies established on expert basis has every possibility not only to bring into life theoretical provision from the sphere of national security (military-political, social-economic and informational) but also to turn into a core institutional structure which, unifying the remaining ISs, will give their activity over-effective, so called synergetic character.


Return
Another materials of author