“Would
you like to eat?” he asked, beckoning to a table scattered with plastic
cartons holding takeout pork kebabs wrapped in paperlike bread, as well
as tomato and cucumber salad. “This kind of lunch is the usual for us
for the past month; we have not gotten back to civilized ways.”
If
whirlwind events of the past month are any guide, Armenia might never
get back to its old ways, civilized or not. On Tuesday, Mr. Pashinyan
became Armenia’s interim prime minister, when a Parliament dominated by
his political foes elected him by a 59-to-42 vote.
After
vowing to remake the country’s political and economic systems, Mr.
Pashinyan told a cheering throng in the central Republic Square in
Yerevan, the capital, that, “Your victory is not that I was elected as
prime minister of Armenia; your victory is that you decided who should
be prime minister of Armenia.”
On March 31, Mr.
Pashinyan, 42, a balding man with a salt-and-pepper beard and slight
paunch, began a quixotic walk across central Armenia to protest an
effort by the president to skirt term limits.
Few
paid much attention at first. Yet within three weeks, Mr. Pashinyan, a
former newspaper editor and political prisoner, had galvanized a civil
disobedience movement that transformed the country’s political
landscape. It forced the retirement of Serzh Sargsyan, the president for
the past decade, and shoved aside the long-dominant Republican Party.
It
was the most sweeping change in this small, landlocked country of about
2.8 million people in the southern Caucasus since it declared
independence from the Soviet Union in 1991.
Mr.
Pashinyan’s election on Tuesday was all the more remarkable because it
happened in the backyard of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, who
sent his congratulations.
Popular
protests tend to alarm Mr. Putin, and he has invaded other former
Soviet states, Georgia and Ukraine, where he saw Russian interests and
influence being threatened. Russia considers Armenia of such strategic
importance that it maintains a military base in the country, and helps
guard Armenia’s borders with Turkey and Iran.
But
by focusing on strictly domestic problems while pledging eternal
brotherhood with Moscow, Mr. Pashinyan deftly avoided a military
intervention by the Kremlin.
“There
are no foreign forces involved in this process,” Mr. Pashinyan said over
lunch. “I have insisted many times that there is no geopolitical
context to our movement, our velvet revolution.”
If
many Armenians find it nothing short of miraculous that their country
seems transformed overnight, Mr. Pashinyan described it as the
culmination of a journey that began some 20 years ago.
As
a journalism student at Yerevan State University, he wrote screeds
against corruption, and was expelled in 1995 before he could graduate.
He
later become the editor in chief of the newspaper Haykakan Zhamanak,
where he continued polemical attacks against politicians and rich
businessman. His car, a Lada Niva, was set on fire outside the
newspaper’s offices in 2004.
In 2008,
he helped organize street protests against what many considered a
tainted presidential election. Some still blame him for bloody clashes
that resulted in the deaths of 10 people, although he denies provoking
the violence.
“I
didn’t trust him,” said Anahit Sahakyan, 42, the owner of the bohemian
Ilik cafe in central Yerevan. “He would shout, ‘They treat you like
slaves! They treat you like dogs!’ He was trying to arouse the animal
instincts in people. I didn’t like it.”
Wanted
by the government, Mr. Pashinyan went on the lam for 16 months. “That
was the hardest time we experienced,” said his wife, Anna Hakobyan, 40,
who met him in journalism school. A security services officer moved into
their apartment, in case he showed up.
With
Mr. Pashinyan in hiding, Ms. Hakobyan took over the newspaper, while
also caring for their three children; they now have four. She did not
see him for six months, but she heard from him — he sent notes accusing
her of destroying the paper, along with occasional praise.
“That was stressful,” she said, laughing.
Eventually,
she would visit him for a few days, changing cars as she moved across
Yerevan to lose the officers tailing her. “Just like the movies,” she
said.
In 2009, Mr. Pashinyan turned
himself in, and was sentenced to seven years in prison, thrown in with
violent criminals. One night, two masked men entered his cell and kicked
him to the ground.
“I am proud that I
experienced it and was able to stay true to myself in that strange
environment under all different kinds of pressure,” he said. He learned
English and read a lot.
When he
returned to their modest, two-bedroom, fourth-floor walk-up after a 2011
amnesty, he was a stranger to their daughter, Shushan, who had been an
infant when he was locked up. “What is Daddy for?” she asked, puzzled.
Elected
to Parliament in 2012, he joined a weak alliance of nine opposition
members. He infuriated many opposition activists in 2015 by not opposing
the governing party’s move to alter the Constitution, shifting most
presidential powers to the prime minister.
Last
month, term limits forced Mr. Sargsyan to step down as president, but
he held onto power by having Parliament elect him prime minister,
despite his pledge not to seek that office. When his plan became clear,
Mr. Pashinyan began preparing his protest.
“I
understood that the best way to prevent violence is to be nonviolent,”
he said. Drawing inspiration from Nelson Mandela and from Gandhi’s
famous 1930 walk across India to protest British taxation, Mr. Pashinyan
decided to walk around 120 miles across Armenia from Gyumri, the
second-largest city, to Yerevan.
Opponents
mocked him for wearing a camouflage-pattern T-shirt, accusing him of
trying to disguise his lack of military service. He laughed off the
criticism, and the shirt became a signature.
His
beard and clothes set him apart from the slick haircuts and suits
favored by the governing party. His supporters saw his look as fitting
for a man they described as down-to-earth, smart, spontaneous and far
less volatile then he had been in his youth.
Students
were already protesting by the time he reached Yerevan on April 13, and
the crowds grew with each step the government took. On April 17, Mr.
Sargsyan become prime minister, and on April 22 he tried to decapitate
the protest movement by having Mr. Pashinyan detained.
Instead, hundreds of thousands of Armenians took to the streets, shouting “Nikol! Nikol!” Bowing to pressure, Mr. Sargsyan stepped down.
The
demonstrations swelled, with Mr. Pashinyan, again free, stressing that
if the police used force, protesters should just raise their hands and
surrender. He told the police repeatedly that they were friends and
fellow Armenians.
Many of those who
had been skeptical became supporters. “He is one of the few political
guys in Armenia who really changed,” said Samvel Martirosyan, a
specialist in internet security and a veteran political observer. “He
became smarter, calmer, he speaks really well.”
On May 1, the governing party, which holds 58 out of 105 seats in Parliament, voted down
his bid to become interim prime minister. So Mr. Pashinyan went to
Yerevan’s central Republic Square, the throbbing heart of the protests,
where an estimated 250,000 people had gathered, and called for a
nationwide strike at 8:15 the next morning.
Supporters
brought the country to a halt, joking that it was a measure of Mr.
Pashinyan’s influence that he could make Armenians do things on time.
Parliament
met again on Tuesday to choose a leader, and this time Mr. Pashinyan
prevailed. He said his first priority was to organize the first fair
parliamentary elections in many years.
Mr.
Pashinyan has vowed to break up the cozy system of oligarchic
monopolies and invigorate an economy that has left a third of the
country in poverty. After 30 years of fighting with Azerbaijan over
Nagorno-Karabakh, a region both countries claim, he has said he will
make the enclave part of Armenia.
He brushes aside fears that he has set expectations so high that he is bound to disappoint.
“I
am in a working mood, there is no sense of euphoria, just work to do,”
Mr. Pashinyan said. “If we were able to do the impossible, that means we
will be able to do the difficult.”
"The New York Times," May 8, 2018
No comments:
Post a Comment