Human Life does not have any Value for them
00:00, December 8, 2011 | News | Rights of Soldiers/Recruits | Armed Forces, Prevention of Corruption
Upon our request, Artur Sakunts, Chairman of Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly-Vanadzor and a member of the Army in Reality Initiativereferred to the statement made at yesterday’s NA Session by the head of the RPA Youth Branch, MP Karen Avagyan. Karen Avagyan labeled Artur Sakunts a traitor and a grant consumer.
“First of all, it is not only aboutthe statement by Karen Avagyan but also the assessment given through different media in the last 10-15 days,to the issue raised by me in Brussels. This is nothing but a respond to my alerts about the situation in the army and armed forces. This is an organized action, which aims at counterattacking and discrediting, and if the topic of arms limitation did not exist they would find another topic.
As to the concepts of a ‘homeland traitor’ and a ‘grant consumer,’ let me state the following. Of course the concept of ‘grant consumer’ does exist, but it mostly refers to government bodies, which received about $ 320,000in grants from World Bank, to develop an anti-corruption strategic program; however, we did not see what anti-corruption strategy or program was developed.
And referring to the ‘homeland traitor,’ I find it absolutely unacceptable to use such terms in a discourse. This has the purpose of creating an internal enemy and I think that if this is accepted and applicable, then the traitors of our homeland are those who directly participate in corruption risks and corruption crimes in the armed forces. These people significantly weaken the fighting efficiency of our armed forces and deteriorate one of the important institutions ensuring the security of our country. I think the misrepresentation of a series of murders in the armed forces as suicides and the inactivity of those responsible for their prevention, as well as the inadequate execution of the criminal cases based on those facts,should be considered homeland treachery.
Numerous incidents happening in the armed forces are reported through media, and why don’t those MPs use their speech times to speak about them. as for example, the murders and the corruption crimes? I feel they are intending to distract public attention from serious issues., I consider this to be a weak self-defense, in other words, not having any arguments regarding the actual crimes, they are targeting thosewho are working towards exposing the real crimes.
I, nonetheless consider these to be pre-election campaign steps aimed at developing a nationalistic and pseudo-patriotic atmosphere among the public.
It is surprising that the head of the Armenian Delegation to NATO speaks about this. It turns out that he does not understand the essence of Armenia’s participation in their relationship with NATO, and although he is the head of the parliamentary he does not understand his role. The resolution of the issues we are raising will directly lead to the improvement of the same armed forces and the increase of their fighting efficiency, and if they do not want to raise those issues, it means they have something to gain from this situation, because that is where they see the continuation of their existence.There is no other reasoning here.
I can say only one thing about those who give such assessments: human life does not have any value for them, because they do not show any interest towards human lives.
They tell me, go and ‘eat’ your grants, but keep your hands off of the army, in other words, you cando anything you want steal or be immoral, but don’t touch the institutions and establishments we need to maintain authority.
I have to disappoint them as we will be persistent in following up with the implementation of the activities of the government bodies which are paid through our taxes. Secondly, we will continue steps towards monitoring the actions of the government officials and those who are conducting government activities under the Constitution.
They do not have the ability to delve into problems, because if their motivation of concern was their country and the basis of their concern was the individual, then they would approach the issues raised by society, in a different way.
Source: www.lragir.am