Europa in turbulenten Zeiten E-Book

• Herausgeber: buch & netz
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Serie: EIZ Publishing
• Sprache: Deutsch

Seitenzahl: 743

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2022

Beschreibung

Die vorliegenden Vorträge wurden im Rahmen der öffentlichen Vortragsreihen des Europa Instituts der Universität Zürich gehalten. Aufgegriffen wurden eine Vielzahl aktueller politischer Entwicklungen, so etwa „Armenia and the Velvet Revolution“ (Tatevik Bahdassarian),  „Hat Russland eine Zukunft?“ (Michail Chodorkowski), „Brexit: new realities and lessons learned for Europe“ (Michel Barnier), „Why the Innocent Plead Guilty and the Guilty Go Free: And Other Paradoxes of the Broken US Legal System“ (The Hon. Jed S. Rakoff), „Zuwanderung und europäische Leitkultur“ (Prof. Dr. Günter Krings), und „Die Europäische Union ist um der Menschen willen da“ (Bundesverfassungsrichter Prof. Dr. Peter M. Huber). Die Vorträge wurden unter erschwerten Rahmenbedingungen in den Coronajahren 2020 und 2021 gehalten, viele davon im virtuellen Raum. Wir danken den Referierenden für Ihre bereichernden Inputs und den Teilnehmern für das uns entgegengebrachte Interesse.

Leseprobe

Europa in turbulenten Zeiten von Andreas Kellerhals wird unter Creative Commons Namensnennung-Nicht kommerziell-Keine Bearbeitung 4.0 International lizenziert, sofern nichts anderes angegeben ist.

© 2022 – CC BY-NC-ND (Book), CC-BY-SA (Text)

Herausgeber: Andreas Kellerhals – Europa Institut an der Universität ZürichVerlag: EIZ Publishing (https://eizpublishing.ch)Satz & Produktion: buch & netz (https://buchundnetz.com)ISBN:978-3-03805-486-3 (Print – Softcover)978-3-03805-487-0 (PDF)978-3-03805-488-7 (ePub)DOI: https://doi.org/10.36862/eiz-486Version: 1.01-20220624

Dieses Werk ist gedrucktes Buch und als Open-Access-Publikation in verschiedenen digitalen Formaten verfügbar: https://eizpublishing.ch/publikationen/europa-in-turbulenten-zeiten/.

1

Vorwort

Im Rahmen seiner Aktivitäten veranstaltet das Europa Institut an der Universität Zürich (EIZ) jährlich eine Anzahl von öffentlichen Vorträgen namhafter Persönlichkeiten aus Politik, Wirtschaft und Wissenschaft zu aktuellen Aspekten der europäischen Integration. Eine Auswahl dieser Referate, welche das Institut in den Jahren 2020 und 2021 organisiert hat, soll mit dem vorliegenden Band einer breiteren Öffentlichkeit zugänglich gemacht werden.

Eine Veröffentlichung ist insbesondere auch deshalb angezeigt, weil es in Folge der Covidpandemie nicht oder nur sehr eingeschränkt möglich war, die Referate öffentlich durchzuführen.

Im Einzelnen umfasst der vorliegende Band Beiträge zum Thema „Armenia and the Velvet Revolution“ (Tatevik Bahdassarian), „Hat Russland eine Zukunft?“ (Michail Chodorkowski), „Insurance: Protect, Prevent, Provoke?“ (Michel M. Liès) und Ambassador Jacques Pitteloud sprach zum Thema „Covid-19 & post Elections Outlook – a US-Swiss Perspective“. Im Rahmen des Churchill Europe Symposium sprach Michel Barnier zum Thema „Brexit: new realities and lessons learned for Europe“ und Bundesrat Ignazio Cassis zum Thema „Winston Churchill und Willy Sax: von der Künstlerbeziehung zur Aussenpolitik“.

Zudem wurden Referate zu folgenden Themen gehalten: „Why the Innocent Plead Guilty and the Guilty Go Free: And Other Paradoxes of the Broken US Legal System“ (The Hon. Jed S. Rakoff), „Zuwanderung und europäische Leitkultur“ (Prof. Dr. Günter Krings), „Indo-Pazifik – das neue geopolitische Zentrum der Welt? Und warum das in der Schweiz und in Europa interessieren sollte“ (Dr. Norbert Riedel), „Investment Climate in Ukraine“ (Ambassador Dr. Artem Rybchenko), „European Integration and Switzerland. Quo vadis?“ (Ambassador Petros Mavromichalis), „Populism and the Future of Democracy in Europe“ (Prof. Michael Ignatieff), „27 Jahre Erfahrung mit dem EWR und Lehren für die Schweiz“ (Dr. Henri Gétaz), „Stewarding a Multinational Firm in Times of Ambiguity“ (Paul Bulcke), „Der Fall Julian Assange – Geschichte einer Verfolgung“ (Prof. Dr. Nils Melzer).

Im Rahmen des Churchill Europe Symposium sprach Aussenminister Jean Asselborn zum Thema „Leidet Europa unter einem Werteverlust?“. Weitere Referate wurden zu folgenden Themen gehalten: „Herausforderungen und Chancen von Kleinstaaten“ (S.D. Erbprinz Alois von und zu Liechtenstein), „Die Europäische Union ist um der Menschen willen da“ (Bundesverfassungsrichter Prof. Dr. Peter M. Huber) und „U.S. Trade Policy – from Trump to Biden“ (Prof. Kathleen Claussen).

Das Europa Institut an der Universität Zürich dankt allen Referentinnen und Referenten herzlich für ihr Mitwirken und für ihre Unterstützung in den Jahren 2020 und 2021. Der Dank geht zudem an Herrn Jonas Niederberger und an Frau Sue Osterwalder für die Gestaltung und Betreuung des vorliegenden Sammelbandes.

Zürich, im Mai 2022 Prof. Dr. Andreas Kellerhals, Direktor

2

Inhaltübersicht

Tatevik BaghdassarianDirector, KASA Fondation Humanitaire Suisse

Armenia and the Velvet RevolutionSpeech given on the occasion of her visit at the Europa Institut at the University of Zurich on 12 February 2020

Michail ChodorkowskiRussischer Unternehmer, ehemaliger Chef des Ölkonzerns Yukos, ehemaliger Gefangener der russischen Regierung, Gründer der Bewegung Open RUSSIA, führender Oppositionspolitiker

Hat Russland eine Zukunft?Referat anlässlich seines Besuches am Europa Institut an der Universität Zürich vom 24. Februar 2020

Michel M. LièsChairman of the Board of Directors of Zurich Insurance Group Ldt and Zurich Insurance Company Ltd

Insurance: Protect, Prevent, Provoke?Speech given on the occasion of his visit at the Europa Institut at the University of Zurich on 8 October 2020

Ambassador Jacques PitteloudAmbassador of Switzerland to the United States of America

COVID-19 & post Elections Outlook – a US-Swiss PerspectiveOnline-lecture given at the Europa Institut at the University of Zurich on 19 November 2020

Bundesrat Ignazio CassisVorsteher des Eidgenössischen Departements für auswärtige Angelegenheiten

Winston Churchill und Willy Sax: von der Künstlerbeziehung zur AussenpolitikReferat anlässlich des Churchill Europe Symposium am Europa Institut an der Universität Zürich vom 31. März 2021

Michel BarnierEU Chief Negotiator with the United Kingdom (2016-2021)

Brexit: new realities and lessons learned for EuropeOnline-lecture given at the Churchill Europe Symposium at the Europa Institut at the University of Zurich on 31 March 2021

Dr. Romeo LacherChairman Julius Baer Group

Closing RemarksSpeech given on the occasion of the Churchill Europe Symposium at the Europa Institut at the University of Zurich on 31 March 2021

The Hon. Jed S. RakoffU.S. Federal District Judge, Southern District of New York (Manhattan)

Why the Innocent Plead Guilty and the Guilty Go Free: And Other Paradoxes of the Broken US Legal SystemOnline-lecture given at the Europa Institut at the University of Zurich on 8 April 2021

Prof. Dr. Günter KringsParlamentarischer Staatssekretär beim Bundesminister des Innern, für Bau und Heimat

Zuwanderung und europäische LeitkulturOnline Vortrag am Europa Institut an der Universität Zürich vom 14. April 2021

Dr. Norbert RiedelBotschafter der Bundesrepublik Deutschland in Singapur (bis 2020 Botschafter in der Schweiz und in Liechtenstein)

Indo-Pazifik – das neue geopolitische Zentrum der Welt? Und warum das in der Schweiz und in Europa interessieren sollteOnline Vortrag am Europa Institut an der Universität Zürich vom 25. Mai 2021

Dr. Artem RybchenkoAmbassador of Ukraine to the Swiss Confederation

Investment Climate in UkraineOnline-lecture given at the Europa Institut at the University of Zurich on 1 July 2021

Petros Mavromichalis

Ambassador of the European Union to Switzerland and Liechtenstein

European Integration and Switzerland. Quo vadis?Speech given on the occasion of his visit at the Europa Institut at the University of Zurich on 24. September 2021

Prof. Michael IgnatieffFormer President and Rector of the Central European University in Budapest and Vienna

Populism and the Future of Democracy in EuropeSpeech given on the occasion of his visit at the Europa Institut at the University of Zurich on 4 October 2021

Dr. Henri GétazGeneralsekretär, EFTA – European Free Trade Association, Genf

27 Jahre Erfahrung mit dem EWR und Lehren für die SchweizReferat anlässlich seines Besuches am Europa Institut an der Universität Zürich vom 13. Oktober 2021

Paul BulckeChairman of the Board of Directors and former CEO of Nestlé

Stewarding a Multinational Firm in Times of AmbiguityOnline-lecture given at the Europa Institut at the University of Zurich on 26 October 2021

Prof. Dr. Nils MelzerSonderberichterstatter über Folter der Vereinten Nationen

Der Fall Julian Assange − Geschichte einer VerfolgungReferat anlässlich seines Besuches am Europa Institut an der Universität Zürich vom 28. Oktober 2021

Jean AsselbornMinister für auswärtige und europäische Angelegenheiten, Minister für Immigration und Asyl, Luxemburg

Leidet Europa unter einem Werteverlust?Referat anlässlich der Churchill Lecture am Europa Institut an der Universität Zürich vom 29. Oktober 2021

S.D. Erbprinz Alois von und zu LiechtensteinAusführendes Staatsoberhaupt des Fürstentums Liechtenstein

Herausforderungen und Chancen von KleinstaatenReferat anlässlich seines Besuches am Europa Institut an der Universität Zürich vom 10. November 2021

Prof. Dr. Peter M. HuberRichter des Bundesverfassungsgerichts der Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Die Europäische Union ist um der Menschen willen daReferat anlässlich seines Besuches am Europa Institut an der Universität Zürich vom 30. November 2021

Prof. Kathleen ClaussenVisiting Professor, University of Zurich Faculty of Law; Associate Professor of Law, University of Miami School of Law; former Associate General Counsel at the Office of the United States Trade Representative in the Executive Office of the President

U.S. Trade Policy – from Trump to BidenSpeech given on the occasion of her visit at the Europa Institut at the University of Zurich on 8 December 2021

Tatevik Baghdassarian

Tatevik Baghdassarian

Director, KASA Fondation Humanitaire Suisse

Armenia and the Velvet Revolution

Speech given at the occasion of her visit at the Europa Institut at the University of Zurich on 12 February 2020

Content

Speech by Tatevik BaghdassarianQ & A

Speech by Tatevik Baghdassarian

Hello everyone, I am really happy to be here and it is nice to see all of these people who are interested to learn about Armenia and the Velvet Revolution. I have to say it is a big responsibility, but I will try to make what happened it interesting and clear for you and explain why it happened. I also will try to give some perspective what the after-effects of the revolution are. [shows pictures of Armenia on slide] This is just a nice view of Armenia in order to make sure you come to Armenia, if you have not been there before. [shows picture of Republic Square in Yerevan] I wanted to show you this. Usually, Republic Square is not as populated as on the photo, but this is a revolutionary photo. You can also see the Mount Ararat very nicely. It is not in Armenia, but in our hearts always.

Before I start my presentation, I want to tell you what my connection to Switzerland is. Why am I here? As Andreas already presented, I work for a Swiss humanitarian Foundation (KASA; Komitas Action Suisse-Arménie) in Armenia. This is a Foundation that was founded by a Swiss couple from Lausanne 23 years ago.

I do not know how much you know about Armenia, but in 1988 we had a huge earthquake that affected a lot of the northern part of the country. Armenia is an ex-Soviet country. Imagine the newly independent country in the 90s, after the collapse of the Soviet Union (USSR), with the earthquake, it was in a very hard situation, both socially and economically. This couple just came to visit Armenia. They came in order to get to know Armenia a bit and they were touched by the potential of the people, but at the same time they saw the misery of the country. They wanted to help the country, so 23 years ago, they founded the Foundation. The aim of the Foundation is to help the development of Armenia. This is the connection to Switzerland.

I have been working for the Foundation for the last 10 years. I have been its director for the last three years and in that role I have been coming to Lausanne to report on what we do in Armenia. Since I have good friends in Zurich, I come to Zurich from time to time. I am happy that I could come and talk to you today.

I do not know how much you know about Armenia I will present some facts that I think are important to understand. We have a very long history and I would not want to annoy you with all this information, but here are two points that I think create our identity and what it means to us to be Armenians.

In 301 AD Armenia accepted Christianity as its state religion. This is something that has been very important throughout our history. This is also the reason why we have not assimilated with our neighbouring countries. Usually, we were surrounded by non-Christian countries, so this was a way for us to preserve our nation and our culture.

The second important thing is the Armenian alphabet that was created in 405 AD. Again, another point in the creation of our identity. We speak and write Armenian, which is a Indo-European language. We are the only ones that use this alphabet. It actually looks very funny for people who do not understand it. The Armenian alphabet is a bit similar to the Ethiopian alphabet, if you know that one. Again, this is something very important to us in terms of preservation of our culture and our identity.

Then some facts about current Armenia. As you can see, [shows map of current Armenia and neighbouring countries] this is today’s Armenia. As you can see, we are surrounded by four neighbours. Turkey, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Iran. Only Georgia is a Christian country, all the other countries are Muslim, which has always put us in a very hard position politically and historically. We do not have a border with Russia, but Russia also plays a very important role in today’s Armenia. It has always had and continues to have an important role. It is difficult to say whether it is positive or negative, but this is a reality and we just deal with it in a way or other.

I am not sure how much you are aware of the region, but we have two closed borders. We have a closed border with Turkey and we have a closed border with Azerbaijan. Why? Because of this Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. That is a current conflict which we have with Azerbaijan. This is why Turkey has also closed its border to us. As an end result, we are a small country with only two open borders. As you can understand, this creates a difficult political and economic situation. We are a landlocked country, which means we are very much dependent on Georgia and Iran and accordingly on Russia.

Armenia has a population of about 3 million people. Another important thing about Armenia is that half of the population is living in the centre, in Yerevan. This also gives you an understanding of the development of the country. Everything is very much concentrated in the capital Yerevan.

Why did I write diaspora? I am almost sure that most of you at some point had a neighbour who was Armenian or Half-Armenian or an Armenian as a very far relative. We have a huge diaspora. As you can see the Armenian diaspora is about three times bigger than the population of Armenians living in the Republic Armenia today. The reason for this, again a short historical fact, is the Armenian Genocide, which happened in 1915. This is also why we have a very difficult relationship with Turkey. Because of this massacre that happened, a lot Armenians had to flee their homeland. We have a huge diaspora in Russia, the United States of America (USA), in France and in Lebanon. We used to have a diaspora in Syria before the war, but now it is more or less gone. This is a very important point for us, because as a state we need to create relations with our diaspora. It is not always so evident, it also has a lot of nuances, how you relate with your diaspora. Unfortunately, when we talk about Armenian diaspora, we do not talk about one unity, we talk about very different cultures. You cannot compare the Russian diaspora with the one in the USA or in France. You have a lot of diversity that needs to be managed. I think unfortunately, as a state, we are not managing it well at the moment. This could be our strength, but we do not know how to use it well yet, I think.

The Armenian state recognises the Armenian apostolic church as the main church, but we are a secular state and we have freedom of religion. However, since we are a very mono-ethnic country, about 98% are ethnic Armenians, most of them are Armenian apostolic. In terms of religion, it is also very mono-religious. That also gives you an understanding of the society.

We have a rather high literacy rate. Why is it important? It is very important in terms of Armenian identity. For us, education is a huge value and it has also helped and supported us during our whole long history. Because we were always willing to put resources in education, and continue to do so from generation to generation. Today, about 80% of the Armenian population has a higher education. It is another question what the quality of higher education is and how it is connected with the labour market, but as an idea, this is what we have.

Finally, we have recently transitioned from a presidential system to a parliamentary republic. This is also very much connected to the revolution. Just as a very short notice to maybe make things a bit clearer later.

In April of 2018, we had what we call the Armenian Velvet Revolution. Although it happened in 2018, it took a long time to reach the point of revolution. The revolution was just a tipping point. What I would like to talk about a bit is why the revolution happened and what causes made people commit acts of civil disobedience for 40 days. As I already said, we used to be a part of the USSR. I am sure that you know that after becoming independent, a lot of countries struggled to create their own state and struggled to create an economic political system that would work differently than the USSR. I have not experienced the USSR myself – when I was born the USSR had already collapsed – but I have seen a lot of what came after, in the newly independent Armenia.

The most vivid memory was that there was corruption everywhere. I do not know whether you can imagine what it means. On every level, starting from the top to the very little things, there was corruption. When I say everywhere, I mean in all spheres: education, healthcare, police, etc. Which means, as an Armenian citizen you were faced with corruption on a day-to-day basis. Just to give you an example: You could easily buy a university diploma, if you had money. You could easily buy a driving license. You could easily buy time. Meaning that if you needed something to be done on a state level, usually it would take a lot of time and paperwork, but if you bribed the right person, then your affairs would be done in ten minutes. Also to be honest, it is very convenient for the citizens, because when I can do something in ten minutes, why would I do something in ten years? This is why the system worked. Because in the short term, it made a lot of people’s lives easier.

Naturally, we had a lot of monopolies. We had a lot of polarisation in our society, because we had and still continue to have a lot of poor people and a lot of rich people. The middle class is non-existent in Armenia. Because of this injustice, you would have this division in society where there was us and there was them. Them, was the government and everything that was connected to it, mostly the business sector. Then there were the simple citizens, who did not have any possibility to exercise their rights as citizens. This is something that accumulated every year and you could see that every year the society showed more and more discontent.

Starting from 2012, we felt this almost every spring when we would have a manifestation about something like the electricity bills going up or a transportation system that was not working. As a society, with time, we also learned to show our discontent with the government. During the Soviet Union, nobody complained, because there was no place to complain. Everybody needed to be happy and everybody “was happy”. After 70 years you really need time to learn how to productively show that you do not agree. But at the same time, if you do not agree, what is your solution? Because it is very easy to say something is bad, but what do you offer as an alternative? Although we had the revolution and it was a huge thing, unfortunately today, society does still not have the level of conscience to continue the – let us say – ideology of the revolution, the fairness and the personal responsibility on an everyday day basis. But this is a really different topic.

Why did the revolution happen in 2018? There were two very important things that led people to become fed up with the situation. One thing was the escalation of the conflict with Azerbaijan. Although we have a cease-fire, there are shootings and deaths on an everyday basis. Maybe not every day, but every month, we know there are soldiers dying from our side or the other side. This is a reality that we have learned to live with. In April of 2016 there was an escalation and we had a so called Four-day War. Of course, this was horrible for both sides, because we cannot say that it was only bad for Armenia. What was very important for Armenia and what in a way awoke us as a society was that we realised that the corruption was also in the army and in the security forces. Just to give you an example: We found out that there was no petrol in our tanks. During the war they could not drive because somebody had stolen the petrol. Just to show you the level of misery that was in the army. This meant that the Armenian state itself was not supporting its soldiers to protect their country. This, I think, was a very important click, that changed a lot in the mentality of the people. We realised that we are not safe anymore due to of all this corruption.

As I told you we used to have a presidential government. Our last president was Serzh Sargsyan, who was re-elected twice and held the office for eight years., I do not have to tell you the elections were never fair. They were already bribed and everybody knew that Serzh Sargsyan is going to be re-elected. As a society, we never believed that voting matters. Because we knew that whatever you vote, he is going to be elected. I think this is also very important, although it might sound strange to you. As running for a third term was unconstitutional, he changed the constitution when his second term expired in 2018. He made Armenia a parliamentary republic so he could be elected as a prime minister who has the big power. Of course, when he was changing the constitution, he publicly said that he promised everyone he would not run for prime minister. Of course nobody believed him, but we said: “Okay, great. Thank you.” Then in 2018, suddenly, he put out his candidacy and he got elected as the prime minister.

This is the second very important point, where people really had enough of everything and we decided that we could not take it anymore. This is when our current Prime Minister, Nikol Pashinyan, started his Velvet Revolution. The act itself lasted about 40 days. It is also important that when I talked about the tipping point, this is where everybody was sick of the situation. This had accumulated in the years starting from 2012. 2018 was just the explosion of everything.

Nikol Pashinyan has always been in politics and he was always in opposition. He always talked, but nobody paid any attention to him. Because the opposition just talks, but then that is it. I mean it is very interesting because Armenia, although it was a very corrupt system, it in a way had liberty of speech. Everybody could say whatever they wanted. Which is a bit sad because no matter what you said, nothing would change. So it was like: “You say what you want, we do what we want to do.”

Nikol Pashinyan and his wife started to walk from a northern city Gyumri to Yerevan. This was the idea. They would walk and at the beginning everybody would say: “Okay, this is Nikol Pashinyan, as usual he is just saying things.” Because after every election we had things like this. Something would flare up and then it would cool down again after four days. When he started, everybody thought this was a failed attempt to change something. [shows picture of Nikol Pashinyan walking with his wife and a few followers] As you can see, when he started to walk there were like two or four people who joined him. The government was not worried. A woman with a baby does not look very dangerous. But very soon, this is what happened. [shows picture of streets filled with people] I have to say that this was very unexpected for us. I do not think that Nikol Pashinyan and his company expected such a result either.

As I already mentioned, discontent accumulated through the years, the economic situation was bad and there was no hope. Young people were leaving the regions and going to Yerevan, afterwards, they left Armenia because there were no jobs, but most importantly, no hope. Nobody wanted to develop anything in Armenia.

Furthermore, I think there were a couple of special things that  united many people. One thing I think was very important  that a very clear message was communicated and it touched everyone. This clear message was that we are fighting against Serzh Sargsyan and his regime, who has been lying to us for the last eight years and before him also the others. Everybody could connect to this very simple idea.

Then, they had a very good campaign. Older movements, were pretty much concentrated in the centre of Yerevan, where you have more or less educated people. But if you were living in a village in a far region, you could not participate because this had nothing to do with your life far from Yerevan. Even if you would want to participate you could not participate. What they did, which was very clever, they made it very decentralised. They had groups in all the regions, all the villages of Armenia, that helped people to participate from their towns and regions without leaving their homes. This had a huge effect. People could easily participate. They also had really easy ways of participation.

You did not necessarily have to go outside on the street. Maybe you could not participate because you work and your employer would fire you if he knew you are a revolutionary. Maybe you could not participate because you have kids at home. They organised it in a way that you could even participate from your home. For example, every evening at seven o’clock, everybody would take their kettles and would bang on them just to join the revolution. Drivers would honk. You do not have to do anything. You are driving your car, doing your general business, then you honk and you join the revolution. This was very smart. This was where everybody felt like being part of what was happening. We have a huge young population that was participating and also a lot of women and kids, something that we did not see before.

Women were in a way the guarantee for safety. Because during all the other movements, the police would at some point go against the people and take them to jail and they would beat them up. It became very violent every time. Of course, if it gets violent, parents do not let their kids participate. What happened this time was that women were there with their small kids and this stopped the police from being violent. Because as Armenians, culturally, we have a huge cult of children. You cannot do anything to children. If there are children, even the police does not become violent. It was a very interesting nuance that we had not seen before.

What we did most of the time is block the streets. Nobody could go anywhere by car in the main streets. We walked everywhere. You could not go to work. I live far from the centre, however, my work is in the centre. So to get to work I had to walk for 1.5h. Which I did. It was fun because in the street you would see some people playing and making music. It was like a festival. Everybody was so happy. Even though Serzh was still there, everybody was happy. I had never seen Armenia so happy. It was really exceptional. The important message was something that we had never heard before, is that the police is also one of us. As I was saying before, the police was also part of the corrupted system and they were always oppressing the people. What the revolution did is say: “They are only doing their duty, so you should not be angry with the police and you should not be violent.” Even if they would attack you, you would not attack back. This was new for us. This is also what helped us, I think, to avoid bloodshed or a lot of other things that we saw before.

Finally, after 40 days Serzh Sargsyan resigned and Pashinyan was elected as prime minister. This day was a public holiday. Even people who did not know each other were celebrating together and drinking wine. Those were very happy moments.

This is all very great. But then we came back to reality. The revolution was something nobody really expected would happen. But what happened after the revolution? What do we see after two years? We see a clear willingness for positive changes on the individual and on the state level. We see that people want to contribute to development and the state is also willing to contribute. Although we see the willingness, we have a lack of responsibility on the individual level. Again we come back to this idea of what it means to be a citizen and what ones responsibilities as a citizen are. What do I have to do to contribute to the wellbeing of the country? Because we are very much used to saying: “The state owes me this, this and this”, but we do not think about what we could give back. This is something that needs time and this is where the civil society comes in. This is what KASA, the organisation that I work for, works a lot on.

To give this balance: On the other side, now we have a very young government which is not corrupt, which is exceptional for us, but at the same time they are young, so there is no institutional memory. The people that managed the state before are gone and the institutional memory is gone with them. The new people are too young, they do not have a lot of experience. They are learning by doing, which is great, but the question is whether we have so much time as a country to give to the government to learn on the way.

A positive thing is that we see there is a fight against structural corruption. This is something that is very obvious. Today, you cannot bribe a policeman on the street. Exceptional. Although structural corruption does not exist, you cannot control everything. The corruption is still in our mind and if there are people that are willing to give bribes, there will always be people who are willing to take the bribe. Again, we need to work on people not giving bribes, understanding that it is wrong. This is where the civil society comes in, because the state does not have that many resources to work there.

As I mentioned before, everything was concentrated in Yerevan. This is very dangerous in terms of security. Because if we have a conflict with two of our neighbours and we do not have anyone living in these regions, then this is a problem. Today, what the government is doing, which is great, is they are investing a lot in the development of the regions and now not everything is concentrated in Yerevan. We have routes that are being renovated, we have never seen so many good routes. We have different activities in the regions. So even Armenians will realise that there is something in Armenia other than Yerevan. There is Gyumri, there is Stepanavan, which is great.

We do not have a lot of natural resources as a country. Our resource mostly is our human capital,  howeverwe have a huge brain drain. We have a big  potential of tourism, because we have a huge history, a lot of churches, a lot of adventure tourism, but this is also something that is now being coordinated at the state level. Armenia is being promoted as a touristic destination and this is also great for our economy. As I also mentioned, unfortunately, we are in a situation of political turmoil. Maybe it is natural after a revolution. Every day you hear news about this guy being arrested, the other guy saying something bad about Pashinyan and there is so much negative information that you do not even understand what is happening. Since we do not as a society have media literacy or citizen identity, it is really difficult to make sense of the situation and to understand whether we are for something or against something and what decision or position we should take. We have a communication problem. One of the greatest things about the revolution was the communication. There was direct and very sincere communication with the people. Something that we had not seen before. This is what also mobilised everybody and made everybody feel very important. Today, unfortunately, we see that there is not enough communication. Of course, there is much more to be done and maybe the government cannot find the time to communicate, but this does not help their cause. People are losing confidence because they do not know what is happening and they do not feel they are participating in the development. As a result, probably as a result of weak communication, we do not have a long term vision: What country do we want to build after the revolution? How do we build it together? I think that because we do not have a vision, we do not have communication, because they do not know what to communicate. They have so many everyday problems to solve that they do not have time to look a bit further.

I think pretty much this is what I wanted to say. I am continuing the state’s strategy, promoting tourism to you. [shows picture of Tatev Monastery] This is one of the millions of monasteries that we have in Armenia. Why did I chose this one? Because it has my name. I mean, I have its name. It is called Tatev, which literally means “give wings”. I think it is a very inspiring monument. It used to be a very important cultural educational centre during the 14th century. I leave you with a positive note. Thank you.

Q & A

Prof. Dr. Andreas Kellerhals (Director, Europa Institut at the University of Zurich): Thank you very much, Tatevik, for this very inspiring and interesting presentation. You talked about the Velvet Revolution: How it happened and why it happened and also some of the issues and problems that are now here to be faced and solved, especially by you. Let me have a first quick question. You said you are working for a Swiss foundation. Can you maybe explain what the Foundation is doing?

Just to be honest, I did not tell Andreas to ask this question. I am passionate about all this revolution as a citizen, but I am also passionate because this is part of my work. This is what we do every day. The goal of the Foundation is to help Armenia in its economic, democratic and social development. We have a staff of 45 young people, mostly women – this is the reality in Armenia – who work on various projects that help create this citizen identity every day.

Maybe for you, when we talk about civic education this is something that comes very natural to you, because you vote for everything every day. But for us it is not that natural. We have an ethnic identity of what it means to be Armenian through language etc., but we do not know what it means to be a citizen. This is what we do a lot. Showing that you, as a citizen, have responsibility in the development of your country and it is not only the state who has to do things. The state also has to do things. That is one of the projects that we do.

The other one is very much connected to the economic integration of young people. Again, we have a huge problem in the market. It is not only that we do not have enough jobs, there is also a huge gap between education and the labour market. Our education system has not caught up with the labour market, which is developing very fast. This gap needs to be minimised. Unfortunately, the burden of this gap minimisation is put upon the civil society. We have a lot of programs that help support young people to find a job in Armenia and even create their own business.

We also work in the field of tourism. For us this is a way to generate income to implement our projects. We are a Foundation that is looking for funding for all of our projects, but at the same time we try to generate our income with the help of tourism. If anybody is willing to support us, it can be done in many different ways. We have different examples of cooperation. We have Sebastian from Switzerland who has been his civil service with us. As an organisation we also receive civil servants who come and work with us on voluntary bases and contribute to the work we do.

Question from the audience: You mentioned the economic situation in Armenia. You told us about the uneven distribution of income. What is the new gov­ern­ment’s economic policy? This is the first question. The second question is: How will the relations with Russia evolve? How does Russia approach the new government? And the third question is: What is new government’s approach to the Armenian genocide?

I will give short answers, because I am not an expert on any of those questions. How does the new government imagine the economic situation? The new government is saying: “After we did the Velvet Revolution, we are going to make an economic revolution.” Great idea. But we are not very sure how this economic revolution is going to happen. When I was talking about a vague long term vision, this is one of the areas. We see that they are doing a lot of tax reforms, which is very positive. But again we do not see the bigger picture. Which is what we are all looking for. What we see is that the government said: – which I think is very important and I already see the tendency among my friends – “Do not wait for your job to be created for you, create your own job and the state will support you.” You will be taxed less or you will work with a non-corrupt tax-inspection. This is something that is new and very inspiring. I have a lot of friends who quit their jobs and started their own business. Before, they would never have dared to do that. I think this is a very good tendency.

Since Russia is always “spying” on us, I will answer in a very diplomatic way. Russia, as I was saying a bit earlier, is a very important ally for Armenia, as you could see from our political and geographic situation. We cannot say that our foreign policy has changed with Russia. Another important thing about the revolution is that it was an internal problem. We solved the internal problem, but we did not change our foreign policy. This is very important. And we are not drastically changing anything, which I think is rather wise, because I think we cannot fight the internal and external “wars” at the same time. When you are asking: “What was the reaction of Russia to the revolution?” Naturally, they were not happy. It is much easier for Russia to work with a corrupt government, that is very logical. Of course, we have a lot economic ties and oligarchs coming from Russia, if the monopolies do not exist in Armenia, it also affects them. Very logically. But we have to say: They did not say anything positive or negative. They try to be neutral and say: “This is the internal affair of Armenia and we do not have any influence.” This is of course not the reality. But this is the discourse that they have. As a state, we have not changed our foreign policy with Russia or anyone else. In terms of security, we have the biggest Russian base in Gyumri. The base is also in a way guarantee for security between Armenia and Turkey, although there is no war. Of course, it is very clear that it is, in a way, a balance. Because we are very small, to be able to protect ourselves from all the neighbours, this is the reality.

Genocide is one of the most sensitive topics for all Armenians. Any gov­ern­ment that says anything about the genocide is always going to be criticised, because whatever you say, it is bad. Whatever you say, you do not fulfil everybody’s expectations. They are not changing the discourse. They are saying that Turkey should recognise the Armenian genocide without any prerequisites.

Yes, we are not even talking about repatriation. Of course it is clear, that if they recognise the genocide, it is not so simple. If they recognise the Armenian genocide, then we have a huge part of the territories. That would need to be discussed. All the economic damage that was done to Armenians needs to be reimbursed. It is very complex. Of course, even though we are not talking about this, it is very clear that after the first step of recognising the genocide, we will go to the second step. Of course nobody will agree to that.

Prof. Dr. Andreas Kellerhals: Is it fair to say that Armenia today is just half of what Armenia used to be? And now it is a part of Turkey and there are no Armenians living there anymore.

No, they took care that no Armenians live there anymore. There are Kurds living there, but there are no Armenians. This is a different topic: We have a hidden Armenian population in Turkey. They have changed their names because they do not want to say they are Armenian, because it will have consequences. Although in Istanbul and in more developed and democratic cities – if I may say – we have an Armenian community. They already know how to communicate with the government. They know what to do and what not to do.

Question from the audience: First of all, I met my very first Armenian in Mexico City, when I was 17 years old. On a very light and positive brainstorming thought. In Christianity, the Lord’s Prayer is something that binds all people. As far as I know, the Lord’s Prayer, originally, is in the Armenian language. This could be a point of touristic attraction to your gorgeous country. Thank you very much, I have learned a lot.

Thank you.

Question from the audience: Thank you very much for this insightful talk. One thing I cannot imagine yet is: How does your Foundation really work day to day? Because, as a Liberal Democrat, of course I am interested in how you instil it in people that they say they are self-responsible and take command of their life’s ship? I think that is difficult even in our society. How do you do this? Is it through workshops?

We do it in different ways and this is, as you mentioned, a long process. We have been doing it for 23 years and I think we still have to do it for another 23 years. We do it on very small examples. One of our projects is that we work with young people to identify the problems in their community and to find solutions to these problems. And go through the process from A to Z. Mobilise the community, work with the state, mobilise the community members to find a mutual interest for, let us say, a trash problem. When they go through all these processes, this is when they also realise that: Firstly, their voice matters. They can change something on a small scale in their community. When they realise that, they understand that then they can go bigger. In their community. In their region. In their country. This is an important mentality change. Then they go through trial and error and they understand what works and what does not. They also understand that it is very difficult when you have to take decisions and you have limited resources. When we say the government is not doing anything: The government always has limited resources and many more problems that it can solve. So it changes their relation to how decisions are made and what you need to do in your everyday life. Let us say: If you do not go to vote when there are elections, then you are not participating. Elections are one way of participating. If you  are not participating, then you do not have a right to say that you are against this regime, because you did nothing to change it. This is a long complex process.

Prof. Dr. Andreas Kellerhals: How much do Armenians really know about the living situation in the rest of Europe?

I think our problem is that we do not have enough exposure. We think that the USA is a paradise, where money grows on trees. Europeans do not have problems because they live in democratic countries, where the train arrives on time. Great. I think we have a very idealistic image of these societies and we do not know the problems. Of course, if you compared a middle-class European to a middle-class Armenian, you see a difference. But at the same time, unfortunately, we do not value the things that we have in Armenia. The human capital, the network and the huge support that we have from our communities. Which, for example, I see less and less. On an individual level, because we do not have the state and we depend a lot on our personal networks. That is why it is very much the human connections that are very developed and very important in a way. But we do not value this because economically it is hard. We also do not know the difficulties in other countries, that for example, in my parents’ generation, almost everyone had a free apartment. This was because the USSR gave them out, this is not the reality in Europe.

Prof. Dr. Andreas Kellerhals: But Armenia is in Europe, right? Armenia is so far away from Europe and you are surrounded by countries that some here would see as a risk. You are living right in the middle of that.

Yes, which I think is a chance on one hand. That is why we are so flexible. We find solutions because we have no other way. But at the same time, again, you are raising an internal question: Whether Armenians are European or Asian. Of course, we are not “Asia” Asians, but I think we have a very mixed culture. We are on the crossroads. This makes our life difficult, although it also makes our life easier. We can understand this side and the other side. But we are searching.

Question from the audience: When I was with you in Armenia, in Yerevan, I realised that this is the advantage of the Armenian people. They are neutral and they do not cry for the EU or for NATO like Georgia. So they do not provoke the Russians. I think you should stay like Switzerland: neutral.

It is an interesting point that you are raising, because according to us we have never been good diplomats. During the history we have made a lot of wrong choices. Maybe this is controversial, but one of them was becoming Christian. Becoming Christian has really made our life very difficult. It would be much easier to be like the others.

Question from the audience: When I walked through the inner-city streets, these beautiful modern buildings, I met a small demonstration crying: “Stop Soros!”, through a megaphone. What is Soros’ influence in Armenia and what are his intentions?

Again, a very controversial topic. After the revolution, the civil society field in Armenia developed a lot. Since a lot of things are lacking, civil society initiatives developed very fast and have tried to solve problems that the state is not solving. At the same time, unfortunately, all these donor organisations have their own agendas. So we have, let us say, a very big U.S. Embassy. The United States is one of the biggest donors in Armenia. And of course, it is clear that they are not doing it because they are humanitarian, but they are doing it because they want something in return. This is a huge discussion. When all this money is invested in the civil society, what is the pretext and what is price of it for Armenia? Because during a lot of these previous demonstrations, people were saying that it is funded by the United States, by Russia, by Europe, I do not know who. I do not know whether it is true or not, but there is always this danger that there are second agendas under all these movements. Soros is one of the biggest funding organisations in terms of civil society, of course there was a huge discussion about it.

Question from the audience: How important is the trade and tourism between Iran and Armenia? Are you affected by the United States’ sanctions against Iran?

We have a very important economic and touristic connection with Iran. We even have a Free Economic Zone in the south part of Armenia which shares a border with Iran. We depend a lot on the economic connections with Iran and yes, we have been indirectly affected by the sanctions because before, we had a lot of tourists coming from Iran. Today, we have less tourists because people do not have enough money to travel. As anything else, why is Iran very important to us? Because since we are under pressure from two sides, we are left with Iran and Georgia. Everything that happens in Iran and Georgia pretty much affects us directly or indirectly. So the deteriorating relationship between Iran and the United States is a very troubling issue for us. The United States also tries to influence Iran through Armenia, which is problematic.

Question from the audience: Is the new state administration aware of you and your organisation and if yes, are you a problem or are you a part of the solution for them?

Well, I have to say that we are part of the solution, of course. Since we are a Swiss founded organisation, we have always worked with all the governments. This is also one of our objectives: If you want to work in a country, if you want to develop a country, you need to work with the government. You cannot say that the current government is bad or good. This is the government that we have. We have been working with the previous and the current government and they are aware of us. Of course you have to be smart and you have to be able to present the activities in a way that does not upset the government. With the previous government, we of course did not say that we work on civil society issues, we said that we are working on the potential of young people.

Prof. Dr. Andreas Kellerhals: Sailing with the Swiss flag is not suspicious?

Yes, but this is a very important thing. The Swiss flag has always helped us in Armenia, because it gave us this image of not being corrupted and being neutral and we play this game.

Prof. Dr. Andreas Kellerhals: That is also what you are, right?

Yes, we are not corrupt, but still.

Question from the audience: I just want to go back to the Velvet Revolution and the related issues and I want to share something with you – maybe you can comment – there are specific keywords we can speak about, such as Amulsar/Amulsahar”, but it is a long topic.

Yes, that is a long topic.

Question from the audience: My theory is that the Syrian Armenians or the Armenians coming from Syria and coming back to Armenia, were one of the key issues and turning points of the revolution as well. So maybe just a short comment on that? Maybe it is also kind of like an eye-opener.

Interesting. I never thought of it in that way. Maybe you can explain a bit more what you mean, because the fact that Syrian Armenians came was a huge change in the society. It was the first time that, as a country, we received 15’000 people. Which is big compared to what we have and also the resources. We received our compatriots, but we realised that it is not that clear. They speak another Armenian than we do, they have a different image of what Armenia is. We still have a lot of integration processes going on, but in terms of economic growth they have contributed a lot because they brought a lot of small business with them. That was what they did in Syria. The food market is flooded with them and the quality of service has grown thanks to the Syrian Armenians who came. But other than that I am not sure what you mean.

Question from the audience: I experienced it more in the civil society as well. So after 2008, Yerevan got really grey and got darker and darker. After 2012, suddenly some colourful points dropped off and it turned out that these Syrian Armenians were brave enough, in fact they did not have anything to lose because they lost everything they had before, for example in Aleppo. They just came to Yerevan and they were really brave. To stand up and open their shops and everything in this corrupt system. This was really small, but it was powerful. For me, it could be one of the key points as well.

It is an interesting point, I never thought of it.

Question from the audience: Yes, it is an outside view. An outside observation.

Prof. Dr. Andreas Kellerhals: Thank you very much for this very interesting talk, which was an eye-opener, I think, for many. When we went to Armenia, we discovered a beautiful place. A beautiful country with hillsides, a lot of history, wonderful churches, old songs and a very impressive and fascinating people. Many of us somehow fell in love with Armenians. Most of us maybe only knew Charles Aznavour or others who have or had some connections to Armenia. Nowadays, we see it in a more clear way and of course wish you all the best for your future and your development. We are very much looking forward to seeing Armenia develop. Thank you very much for being here!

Michail Chodorkowski

Michail Chodorkowski

Russischer Unternehmer, ehemaliger Chef des Ölkonzerns Yukos, ehemaliger Gefangener der russischen Regierung, Gründer der Bewegung Open RUSSIA, führender Oppositionspolitiker

Hat Russland eine Zukunft?

Referat anlässlich seines Besuches am Europa Institut an der Universität Zürich vom 24. Februar 2020

Inhalt

Referat von Michail ChodorkowskiQ & A

Referat von Michail Chodorkowski

[Simultanübersetzt aus dem Russischen] Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren, ich freue mich, dass ich nun zum zweiten Mal die Gelegenheit habe, hier in diesem Hörsaal aufzutreten. Es ist mir klar, dass wir alle vor sechs Jahren etwas anders aussahen, aber was soll man machen. Leider sprechen wir heute über ein Land, wo die erforderlichen Veränderungen nicht stattfinden. Das ist mein Land. Russland nähert sich jetzt einem neuen Scheidepunkt, das ist das Jahr 2021.

2021 finden die Wahlen zur neuen russischen Staatsduma statt. Eigentlich ist unser Parlament keine wirklich bedeutende Institution. Es hat nicht die notwendigen weitgehenden Rechte. Doch das Parlament, das 2021 gewählt werden wird, wird eine besondere Bedeutung haben. Dieses Parlament wird den Prozess des Übergangs der Macht gewährleisten, der 2024 stattfinden soll. Im Jahr 2024 wird es fünfundzwanzig Jahre her sein, seit dem Zeitpunkt an dem Wladimir Putin Präsident geworden ist. Zur Zeit hat er die Macht zwanzig Jahre inne. 2024 müsste er die Macht eigentlich abgeben. Wie nähern wir uns jetzt diesen Veränderungen?

In Russland wächst die Wirtschaft seit sieben Jahren praktisch nicht mehr. Das obwohl die Erdölpreise recht hoch sind. Das Wirtschaftswachstum in Russland ist ungefähr vergleichbar mit jenem der Schweiz, nur hat man in der Schweiz eine ganz andere Basis. Wir nähern uns diesem Datum mit zerstörten demokratischen Institutionen. Unser Parlament hat keine Rechte. Unsere Gerichte sind abhängig. Die lokalen Selbstverwaltungen haben keine Vollmachten und kein Budget. Wir nähern uns diesem Scheidepunkt mit einer Last mehrerer militärischer und diplomatischer Konflikte, die wir eigentlich gar nicht brauchen. Ich nenne nur einige an denen Russland direkt beteiligt ist: die Ukraine, Syrien, Libyen und Venezuela. Das ist nur der Beginn einer ganzen Aufzählung. Wir nähern uns diesem Scheidepunkt in einer Situation, in der Wissenschaftler und talentierte junge Menschen das Land verlassen. Wir haben in diesem Land repressive Gesetze, welche die Redefreiheit, die Versammlungsfreiheit und die Teilnahme an Wahlen einschränken. Die Rechtsanwendungspraxis wird immer repressiver.

Wenn man uns vor fünf oder zehn Jahren gesagt hätte, dass man für einen Kommentar in den sozialen Netzwerken hinter Gitter geraten kann, dann hätten wir das nicht geglaubt. Aber das ist die heutige Situation. Wenn man mir vor zehn Jahren gesagt hätte, dass sich eines Tages eine Frau, die zwei Kinder hat, die Vorlesungen und Diskussionen organisiert hat, für ein Jahr zu Hause unter Hausarrest eingesperrt wird, dann hätte ich das nicht geglaubt. Ihr Name ist Anastasia Shevchenko, sie lebt in Rostow. In der Zeit, in der sie unter Hausarrest stand, ist ihre Tochter gestorben. Die Repression, die jetzt im Bereich der Wirtschaft, der Politik und der Kultur in den Eliten stattfindet, ist vergleichbar mit der Repression unter Stalin. Von der regionalen Elite werden im Jahr zwei Komma fünf Prozent Repressalien unterworfen. Wobei die Gefängnisstrafen bis zu zwanzig Jahre betragen. Dabei kennt die Gesellschaft bereits die betrügerischen Handlungen, die der Kreml unternimmt, um die jetzigen Machthaber an der Macht zu halten.

2008 hat der jetzt regierende Präsident mit dem damaligen Premier-Minister vereinbart, dass sie für vier Jahre die Rollen tauschen. Dann haben sie ohne jegliche Scham in der Öffentlichkeit, vor laufenden Fernsehkameras, erklärt: „Wir tauschen und dann tauschen wir wieder zurück.” Dann hat sich Putin seine Amtszeit von vier Jahren auf sechs Jahre verlängert. Er hat auch die Anzahl dieser Amtszeiten manipuliert, um sie von zwei Amtszeiten auf vier zu erhöhen. Die Gesellschaft weiss das alles. Deshalb taucht nun in der Elite und in der Gesellschaft die Frage auf: „Was für eine Zukunft erwartet uns?”

Diese Frage richten sich nicht nur an die Machthabenden, sondern auch an die Opposition. Denn es verstehen alle, dass das Risiko der Destabilisierung mit jedem Jahr wächst. Das ganze System hält sich eigentlich an dieser Figur eines alternden Menschen. Putin hat sich in eine Situation gebracht, in der er derjenige ist, der sämtliche Konflikte zu lösen hat, mit denen das Land zu tun hat. Aber er wird damit eigentlich nicht mehr fertig. Er wird auch nicht jünger und seine Fähigkeit mit Konflikten fertigzuwerden wird nicht besser. Er ist nun schon siebzig Jahre alt. Er kann sterben. Er kann seine Arbeitsfähigkeit verlieren. Das verstehen alle.

Die Machthabenden haben nun ihre Lösung der Situation vorgeschlagen. Zunächst wollten sie diese Frage dadurch lösen, dass sie Russland und Weissrussland vereinen wollten. Man wollte den Posten eines Präsidenten dieser beiden Vereinten Staaten schaffen, auf den man dann Putin gesetzt hätte. Aber der Präsident Weissrusslands, Aljaksandr Lukaschenka, wollte sich nicht plötzlich in Sibirien wiederfinden. Auf diese Situation wollte sich Lukaschenka nicht verlassen. Dann schlugen die Machthaber vor, die Verfassung zu ändern. Diese Verfassungsänderungen waren mit heisser Nadel gestrickt.