[Joint House and Senate Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
REFORM IN ARMENIA: ASSESSING PROGRESS
AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR U.S. POLICY
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
OCTOBER 22, 2019
__________
Printed for the use of the
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe
[CSCE 116-1-8]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via www.csce.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
38-166PDF WASHINGTON : 2020
COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS
HOUSE
SENATE
ALCEE L. HASTINGS, Florida ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi,
Chairman Co-Chairman
JOE WILSON, North Carolina BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland
ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
EMANUEL CLEAVER II, Missouri CORY GARDNER, Colorado
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee MARCO RUBIO, Florida
BRIAN FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
RICHARD HUDSON, North Carolina THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
GWEN MOORE, Wisconsin TOM UDALL, New Mexico
MARC VEASEY, Texas SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island
EXECUTIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS
Department of State, to be appointed
Department of Commerce, to be appointed
Department of Defense, to be appointed
[ii]
REFORM IN ARMENIA: ASSESSING PROGRESS
AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR U.S. POLICY
----------
October 22, 2019
COMMISSIONERS
Page
Hon. Marc Veasey, Commissioner, Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe.......................................... 1
Hon. Robert B. Aderholt, Commissioner, Commission on
Security and Cooperation in Europe............................. 7
MEMBERS
Hon. Jackie Speier, a Representative from California............. 4
Hon. Frank Pallone, a Representative from New Jersey............. 6
Hon. Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative from Texas
WITNESSES
Hamazasp Danielyan, Member of Parliament (My Step
Alliance), National Assembly of Armenia........................ 8
Arsen Kharatyan, Founder and Editor-in-Chief, AliQ Media......... 11
Daniel Ioannisian, Program Director, Union of Informed
Citizens....................................................... 13
Miriam Lanskoy, Senior Director, National Endowment for Democracy 15
Jonathan D. Katz, Senior Fellow, German Marshall Fund............ 17
APPENDIX
Prepared statement of Hon. Marc Veasey........................... 30
Prepared statement of Hon. Jackie Speier......................... 33
Prepared statement of Hon. Frank Pallone......................... 35
Prepared statement of Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin.................... 36
Prepared statement of Hamazasp Danielyan......................... 38
Prepared statement of Arsen Kharatyan............................ 41
Prepared statement of Daniel Ioannisian.......................... 45
Prepared statement of Miriam Lanskoy............................. 47
Prepared statement of Jonathan D. Katz........................... 50
Statement for the record from the Armenian National Committee of
America........................................................ 55
REFORM IN ARMENIA: ASSESSING PROGRESS
AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR U.S. POLICY
October 22, 2019
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe
Washington, DC
The hearing was held at 2:05 p.m. in Room 210, Cannon House
Office Building, Washington, DC, Hon. Marc Veasey,
Commissioner, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe,
presiding.
Commissioners present: Hon. Marc Veasey, Commissioner,
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe; and Hon.
Robert B. Aderholt, Commissioner, Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe.
Members present: Hon. Jackie Speier, a Representative from
California; Hon. Frank Pallone, a Representative from New
Jersey; and Hon. Sheila Jackson Lee, a Representative from
Texas.
Witnesses present: Daniel Ioannisian, Program Director,
Union of Informed Citizens; Arsen Kharatyan, Founder and
Editor-in-Chief, AliQ Media; Miriam Lanskoy, Senior Director,
National Endowment for Democracy; Hamazasp Danielyan, Member of
Parliament (My Step Alliance), National Assembly of Armenia;
and Jonathan D. Katz, Senior Fellow, German Marshall Fund.
HON. MARC VEASEY, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND
COOPERATION IN EUROPE
Mr. Veasey. [Sounds gavel.] Good afternoon and welcome.
This U.S. Helsinki Commission hearing on ``Reform in Armenia:
Assessing Progress and Opportunities for U.S. Policy'' will
come to order.
If there are any members that aren't commissioners, please
come up and ask questions and come onto the dais.
Eighteen months ago, the people of Armenia began marching
in the streets in a massive protest and civil disobedience
movement that would become known as Armenia's Velvet
Revolution. Yerevan, Armenia's capital, had seen waves of mass
protest in recent years, but no one could have predicted that
this manifestation of popular will would achieve the
transformative change it has so far.
At the beginning of last year, it was difficult to imagine
that the ruling Republican Party of Armenia's grip on power was
so tenuous, that it would recede and effectively vanish from
politics in a matter of months after being in power for more
than two decades. What's more, the government's history of
violently suppressing protests meant that demonstrators knew
theirs was a dangerous and inauspicious undertaking.
Few knew these lessons better than Nikol Pashinyan, the
opposition leader at the center of the Velvet Revolution who
was forced into hiding and jailed after helping organize
protests against the initial election in 2008 of then-President
Serzh Sargsyan, the very leader he helped depose last year to
become Armenia's current prime minister. The fact that this
revolutionary political change took place without a shot fired
is a testament to the strength, unity, and discipline of the
protest movement, as well as to the responsible decisionmaking
of government officials who declined to resort to violence to
cling to power.
The 2018 protest movement coalesced around the demand to
stop the term-limited president from becoming prime minister,
but quickly grew to encompass broader goals, and those were
demanding an end to systematic corruption, respect for the rule
of law, and economic justice. These are demands that vaulted
opposition legislator and protest leader Nikol Pashinyan to a
landslide victory in parliamentary elections in 2018.
As we near the 1-year anniversary of this historic
election, the Helsinki Commission is convening this hearing to
gauge how the Armenian Government is delivering on its
revolutionary promise. What has it achieved so far, and where
should it channel its focus in its second year and beyond?
We're also interested in how U.S. policy is adjusting to
this unique political opening. Are our assistance levels
adequate? Are they properly tailored to promote freedom,
security, and sovereignty of the Armenian people? Given our
mandate as the Helsinki Commission to focus on the Organization
for Security and Cooperation in Europe, how are multilateral
institutions like the OSCE responding?
I'm pleased that we have here with us today some of the
Congressional Armenian Caucus leaders who have trained their
focus on these questions and introduced appropriations language
that would double the U.S. assistance to Armenia for the sake
of bolstering democratic reforms. I also understand that USAID
has responded to the political transformation in Yerevan by
undertaking a strategic reassessment of its programming in this
country. My hope is that this hearing will generate substantive
recommendations for how to orient USAID's forthcoming programs
toward the most critical reform priorities.
In the realm of multilateral assistance, the commission is
particularly interested in Armenia's engagement with the OSCE,
the regional security organization this commission tracks as
part of its statutory obligations. Regrettably, however, OSCE's
assistance to Armenia's reform objectives is hamstrung by the
closure of the OSCE's Field Office in Yerevan since 2017, when
the Government of Azerbaijan unilaterally blocked the consensus
required to extend the office's mandate. Without this office,
it is more difficult to maintain regular OSCE engagement with
the Armenian Government to develop and implement important
training, capacity building, and policy development
initiatives.
In response to the OSCE Field Office's closure, the U.S.
has initiated an Armenian cooperation program that draws
together voluntary contributions from OSCE participating States
to support OSCE programs in the country. The Armenian
cooperation program is contributing to the government's
security and economic reforms, but this partnership should
extend to judicial independence, parliamentary oversight, and
also free and fair elections. I hope this hearing can serve as
an encouragement to our partners in the OSCE to increase their
commitment to Armenia's reform program through contributions to
this U.S.-led initiative. I also hope that Azerbaijani
authorities will reconsider their decision to block the mission
and welcome discussions to reopen it.
Before proceeding further, I'd also like to thank Chairman
Alcee Hastings for the opportunity to chair today's hearing on
an issue of profound importance not only for the people of
Armenia, but for the future of democracy and human rights in
Eurasia and the OSCE region as a whole.
At this time, I would like to acknowledge other
commissioners that are here and, again, Members of the
Congressional Armenian Caucus--Jackie Speier and Frank
Pallone--that are here, and anyone else in attendance for
opening remarks that they wish to make.
We have assembled an excellent panel to discuss
developments in Armenia and to provide their recommendations
for the path forward.
We're honored to have with us from Yerevan a distinguished
parliamentarian from Armenia's National Assembly and a member
of the My Step Alliance, Hamazasp Danielyan. Mr. Danielyan
spent much of his career working in civil society and managing
democracy promotion programs in Armenia. In the National
Assembly, he serves as the coordinator of the Parliamentary
Working Group on Electoral Reform.
And then we're going to hear from Arsen Kharatyan. Mr.
Kharatyan is the founder and editor-in-chief of AliQ Media, an
independent Armenian news outlet based in Georgia. Mr.
Kharatyan is a founding member of Prime Minister Pashinyan's
Civil Contract Party and served as a senior advisor to him
during the first 100 days of his tenure as prime minister.
Our third witness is going to be Daniel Ioannisian, who is
visiting from Yerevan, where he works as a program director for
the Union of Informed Citizens, which is an NGO focused on
developing Armenia's independent media sector and tackling
issues such as disinformation and media literacy. As a
political activist and civil society leader, he has developed
expertise in many areas of democratic reform, and currently
serves as secretary of the parliamentary working group working
on electoral reform that is led by Mr. Danielyan.
Also, in addition to Mr. Ioannisian, we will hear testimony
from Miriam Lanskoy, senior director for Russia and Eurasia at
the National Endowment for Democracy. Ms. Lanskoy has spent 14
years experiencing and studying and supporting democracy
promotion in the former Soviet Union.
Last, Jonathan Katz, who is a senior fellow at the German
Marshall Fund, will testify on his considerable experience
managing U.S. assistance programs in the former Soviet Union.
From 2014 until 2017, he served as deputy assistant
administrator at USAID, where he managed U.S. development
policy, energy security, economic growth, democracy, and
governance programs in Eastern and Central Europe and the Black
Sea and the Caucasus regions.
I will refer you to the materials in your audience handouts
for the full biographies of all of our witnesses. Again, thank
you for being here today.
And before we hear from Mr. Danielyan and his testimony, I
also want to welcome His Excellency Mr. Varuzhan Nersesyan, the
Ambassador of the Republic of Armenia to the United States, who
is also here today. Thank you, sir, for joining us.
I look forward to hearing all the experts' assessments and
their expertise on Armenia. And now we invite Mr. Danielyan to
begin his testimony.
Mr. Danielyan. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Veasey. If you could please pause very quickly, I
believe Ms. Speier is going to have remarks and then we'll come
to you, Mr. Danielyan.
HON. JACKIE SPEIER, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM CALIFORNIA
Ms. Speier. Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this very
important hearing on the burgeoning democracy in Armenia. I
have met with almost all of your panelists, I believe I have
met actually each and every one of you, on one level or
another. And I regret that I'm not going to be able to stay
because I am a member of the Intelligence Committee and we are
knee-deep in interviews right now on the impeachment inquiry.
So forgive me for not being able to stay.
But, Mr. Chairman, I wanted to share with you my
observations, having just returned from Armenia. And I know my
colleague and co-chair of the caucus on issues regarding
Armenia, Mr. Pallone, will also speak. Although we passed in
the night, so to speak, we were not there simultaneously, but
we did bookend each other in our travels.
Over the last year and a half, I have watched, as many of
us have, with excitement and admiration as Armenia's people
have transformed the government from a staid autocracy to a
burgeoning democracy--all without a shot being fired. Seared in
my mind are the signature images of Armenia's Velvet
Revolution: hundreds of thousands of women and men in the
streets protesting, children blocking the roads with their toy
cars and trucks, and that defiance turning into joyful dancing
and singing as Armenia's people and future carried the day.
As I said, 2 weeks ago I had the privilege to visit Armenia
as a member of the first dedicated congressional trip to the
country since the revolution. And I could not be more excited
or encouraged about the progress that's being made after being
there. Armenia's democracy is brand new: 102 of the 132
parliamentarians have never held public office before and its
bureaucrats are inexperienced. But I have good news: they are
up to the challenge.
I truly was blown away by the bright young people who will
define Armenia's next chapter. They have much work to do:
building political parties, reforming institutions, and writing
and implementing laws. But they are truly up to the challenge.
Armenia's young people are brilliant, engaged, and capable,
and they understand that they must act quickly to take
advantage of their unique opportunity to define their country's
future. I repeated that sentiment with the prime minister, the
president, and with many of the members of the parliament.
There is a small window of time in which to act, and act they
must.
The efforts that are underway are daunting. There's no
question about it. To reshape a country that has been under a
mostly corrupt organization beforehand is very important. Some
of the basic things that need to take place include building a
modern, efficient bureaucracy; reforming the constitution and
the electoral code; and improving the country's infrastructure
and delivery of basic services, like trash pickup and street
cleaning. All we need to do is follow the lead.
I'm very grateful that my amendment to allocate an
additional $40 million in democracy aid to Armenia received a
resounding 268 bipartisan votes on the House floor, and it
continues with this hearing today. Going forward, we must
continue to highlight Armenia's progress, assist its
government, and partner with its parliamentarians.
I will say--and I'm sure my colleague, Mr. Pallone, will
speak to this as well--we traveled to Artsakh and met with the
HALO [Hazardous Area Life-support Organization] Trust there
that has been doing an incredible job in demining. And yet, we
have reduced the funding to $500,000 in the next year to have
them draw down when, in fact, they still need $6 million over 3
years to complete their work. So I'm hopeful that we will
rethink that allocation and recognize that we must assist in
competing the task that HALO has started.
In meeting with the prime minister, he also made the plea
to us that they want assistance in terms of training their law
enforcement, and particularly to acquire police vehicles, much
like the vehicles we have here in the United States. So we must
also ensure that Armenia's leaders understand that taking
advantage of their special limited opportunity to drive their
country's future will require laying out specific plans. So
it's not good enough to just say we are moving forward. I think
the Armenian people need to know specific plans that will be
undertaken.
Armenia has come so far in such a short period. It is truly
remarkable, and inspiring, and a reminder that even in the
shadow of growing global autocracy, even in a neighborhood
filled with bad actors, and even when it seems more distant,
the flame of democracy burns bright and we can help it grow.
I want to thank you again for holding this hearing, Mr.
Chairman, and I look forward to the testimony. I regretfully am
going to have to leave, but I will certainly read the testimony
once it's transcribed.
And let me just say, as I leave, what's happening in
Ukraine should be a warning to all of us that if we are not
vigilant, if we do not support democracies that exist in that
part of the world, we will be damned in the future. And I yield
back.
Mr. Veasey. Representative Speier, thank you for your
comments and thank you for joining us.
The chair now recognizes from New Jersey, Mr. Pallone.
HON. FRANK PALLONE, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW JERSEY
Mr. Pallone. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you
and the U.S. Helsinki Commission for having this really
important hearing today. And, as my colleague Jackie Speier
from California mentioned, we were very fortunate just in the
last few weeks, the two of us as well as Judy Chu, to travel to
Armenia and see the results of the Velvet Revolution and meet
some of the parliamentarians, including Mr. Daniel Ioannisian,
who's going to be the first person to testify today.
I'll be brief, but I just wanted to say that it is
incredible to me the amount of progress that has been made by
Armenia since the first time I visited. I visited a few years
after the breakup of the Soviet Union. And I can't stress
enough, this was a new republic, a new country coming out of
the Soviet Union that had a war over Artsakh, that had an
earthquake which devastated major parts of the country, that
continued to be blockaded then and today by its neighbors,
Turkey and Azerbaijan, and was cut off, in the aftermath of the
Soviet Union, from its market. Remember that Armenia was part
of this market with the Soviet Union. It was a manufacturing
center that produced a lot of products that were sold in the
other parts of the Soviet Union.
So it was really on its knees. It was in bad shape. But
even then, I think there was a feeling on the part of the new
government that they had to be democratic; that they had to be
market-oriented; that they had to enforce the rule of law. And
I would be the first to admit that it was a long time before
all those things came to fruition. And they're still not
completely at fruition. But the bottom line is, when we had the
Velvet Revolution in April 2018, it was really a culmination of
what I felt was the way that Armenia wanted to go. Armenia very
much looks to the West and looks to our institutions.
And I'm not going to suggest that there still isn't a lot
more that needs to be done with regard to judicial reform,
constitutional reform, corruption, and police reform. Jackie
mentioned that the prime minister stressed that to us more than
anything else, because he thought that was something that we
could work on together. There's a lot more that needs to be
done, but they have just made so much progress, and there's so
much optimism in the air.
And every one of these things that I just mentioned, the
parliament is now working on. When we were there, we actually
had an opportunity to go and listen to some of the debates by
some of the members of the U.S. Friendship--they have a U.S.
Friendship Council that's the equivalent of our Armenia Caucus.
And we were there on a MECEA trip and they're coming here in
November, some of the leaders of their equivalent of the
Armenia Caucus.
And they were working on the judicial reform as we spoke.
That was part of the debate in the parliament that ultimately
passed. So I can't stress that enough. And, as Jackie said,
this was a Velvet Revolution. Think about it. We know what
happened in Russia. We know that Ukraine continues to be a
dictatorship--or, not Ukraine--Belarus continues to be a
dictatorship. We know how difficult it is for Ukraine. But
here, without firing a single shot, the president resigned,
there were new elections that were totally transparent last
December. And I can't stress enough how much they're doing to
bolster civil society, strengthen the democratic and judicial
institutions, and root out corruption.
But the main thing I wanted to say--and I know Jackie
alluded to that as well--is that's why we in the Armenian
Caucus are really working hard to try to get the State
Department and USAID to fund projects in Armenia. For example,
we met with the high tech minister. And there are so many
things that could be done there if we could do some more USAID
projects, or other projects with U.S. help. We met with the
health minister. The prime minister talked about police reform.
Every one of these things could be done either through USAID or
some of the other democratic institutions that we have here. So
we're really trying to encourage that. We want the U.S. to get
involved.
I introduced a resolution that aims to officially recognize
the democratic reforms that the country's taking. And that's
now in our International Relations Committee. I know that
they're going to move that fairly quickly. I should also
mention, if I can, that it's very likely that the Armenian
genocide resolution is going to come to the floor next week. I
know that might not seem to be the topic today, but I think
it's also something that needs to be done in order to talk
about the terrible history that Armenians faced over 100 years
ago.
And so I'm hoping that under the auspices of both the
Helsinki Commission as well as our efforts with the Armenia
Caucus, that we can provide the investments that will build on
the current U.S.-Armenia strategic relationships and help to
grow what I consider an already thriving pro-democracy movement
to reach its fruition with our aid.
Thank you, again. My colleague for Energy and Commerce--I'm
going to say one more thing. I chair the Energy and Commerce
Committee. Marc is also on it. And a lot of the things that we
mentioned in Armenia come right under our jurisdiction--tech,
health care, energy. There are so many things that we have to
look at in our committee--not that I'm going to tell you what
to do. But we can work together on some of these things in our
committee.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Veasey.
Mr. Veasey. No, that's very true, Mr. Pallone. Thank you
very much for being here today. Thank you for joining us. And
thank you for your testimony.
And now the chair recognizes from Alabama, Mr. Robert
Aderholt.
HON. ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, COMMISSIONER, COMMISSION ON SECURITY
AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE
Mr. Aderholt. Thank you Mr. Chair. Just want to say, good
to be here. I've been a member of the Helsinki Commission for
many years now. And it's an important committee, it looks at
issues around the world, and hot spots, and places that we can
work together to make the different regions of the world our
partners in many different ways. I don't have any really
official opening comments. I want to say I'm glad to be here
and look forward to the testimony that we're about to hear.
Thank you.
Mr. Veasey. Mr. Aderholt, thank you very much.
And now I'm going to recognize Mr. Danielyan to begin his
testimony. And want to remind all the witnesses that we're here
for an abbreviated time period. So, if you want to, make your
remarks brief so everyone can have a chance to go, and we can
have questions and answers, that would be great.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Danielyan.
MR. HAMAZASP DANIELYAN, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT (MY STEP
ALLIANCE), NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF ARMENIA
Mr. Danielyan. Thank you, Mr. Veasey. And thank you,
Helsinki Commission members.
Let me start with thanking the honorable members of this
distinguished commission for organizing these hearings and
bringing Armenia's democratic transformation under the
spotlight. Your interest toward democratic developments in
Armenia is very encouraging. The support is very much
appreciated. I should say that as a member of the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Organization for Security and Cooperation of
Europe, we established good level working relations with the
U.S. delegation and distinguished members. At the same time, I
should bring your attention to the fact that there is much yet
to be done in deepening our cooperation across all three
dimensions of the OSCE.
I believe this hearing will contribute to that aim,
especially in the direction of human rights and democracy. I
also believe that Armenia's recent experience of peaceful
democratic transformation has much to offer for many countries
in the region and across the globe. And this experience and
commitment to democratic failures and human rights was also
recognized only a few days ago when Armenia was elected by the
vote of more than 140 U.N. member states to be a member of the
Human Rights Council of the United Nations.
Now, coming to the process of democratic transformation,
for me there are many aspects I would like to present. While I
was making my close to 30-hour-long trip to stand in front of
you, to make this 5-minute testimony, I was thinking, what are
the best ways to present the process that is happening in
Armenia? And I came to the conclusion that maybe instead of
presenting the details of democratic reforms and strategies,
and all the documents that I suspect are being and can be
communicated in a better forum, I will talk a little bit about
my personal experience and journey, which is directly
intertwined with the trends that are happening in Armenia, and
present a few episodes from the past 10 or so years.
So, first, let me begin with the February 2008 contested
presidential elections that were happening in Armenia. I was in
my career working for a nongovernmental organization in the
United States, IFES, the International Foundation for Electoral
Systems. And through this organization, we were supporting
democratic elections in Armenia, as well as witnessing the
systemic level of rigged elections. I cannot forget the efforts
of a brave American woman, whose name is Linda Edgeworth, who
was trying to save one of the local observers that was being
harassed in the local precinct.
The number of precincts in Armenia are close to 2,000. And,
unfortunately, there were not enough Lindas to assist stopping
the systemic level of vote rigging. After these elections, for
10 days citizens of Armenia protested peacefully on the streets
of Armenia. And this resulted in one of the darkest days of
modern Armenian history, March 1st, 2008, when, because of the
use of lethal force, 10 people were killed on the streets. Only
a few months later, I remember a conversation with my friend
and colleague Arsen Kharatyan, in DC, in the summer of 2008,
about the democratic prospects of Armenia. And those were not
very hopeful conversations. And prospects were not very bright.
Despite that, I returned to Armenia with the hope of
contributing to the democratic development of Armenia. And one
of the best and secure ways to do it was joining USAID efforts.
And I should say that most of my career I spent working with
different USAID projects aimed at working in the democracy and
governance sector in Armenia and aimed at strengthening
democratic institutions in Armenia. I remember 2012 when I was
hired as a country expert for reviewing USAID's country 5-year
strategy. And after a number of failed attempts to improve
elections and strengthen parliament, there wasn't much optimism
about the direction of Armenia's political development.
An important milestone in the negative development toward
the autocratization of Armenia, in my opinion, was the adoption
of constitutional changes in December 2015, which paved the way
for a president, who was elected in 2008, to extend his rule
beyond the two terms by changing the governing system in
Armenia. I remember clearly that while drafting the annual
report--I was drafting the annual report for Freedom House in
2016, I believe--I noticed that there was another year of
stagnation of Armenia, and that my country slowly, but
steadily, was coming closer to downgrading to the category of
totalitarian regimes, despite all the efforts of civil society,
international partners, and very few and already marginalized
changemakers in the government.
I should admit, there were moments when I started to doubt
that I would ever witness genuine democratic changes, or even a
single free and fair election in Armenia within my lifetime. I
had the same doubts when I joined the protesters in April 14,
2018 in Freedom Square, the place that was the epicenter of all
important political developments in modern Armenian history,
starting with the struggle for independence from the Soviet
Union. There were a couple of thousand protesters. And I
remember, along with Daniel Ioannisian who was there with his
drone documenting the event, a small child with Arsen talking
about the importance of raising our disagreement with the plan
of Serzh Sargsyan to remain as the leader of country.
Indeed, many of us were there just to protest this final
act of the well-planned process of making Armenia into another
post-Soviet country that is indefinitely ruled by a single
person and a single party. Few could predict that only after a
couple of weeks, this strongman would be forced to resign by
hundreds of thousands of peaceful protestors, who joined those
few of us, led by current Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan.
Already, by the beginning of July 2018, a commission of experts
was formed that was led by--Armenia's a small country, so I
will keep repeating the same names--Daniel Ioannisian, that was
tasked to table a package of changes for the electoral code in
preparation of snap parliamentary elections.
I was member of that commission, but I joined it slightly
later because I was in this beautiful city early July
supporting the work of the Smithsonian Institution, because
Armenia was featured in its Folk Life Festival. After a couple
of months of work, this commission was able to prepare a
package of bills exactly 1 year ago, October 22d, 2018. The
parliament rejected this bill, and the parliament still had a
majority of the outgoing party of previous regime. And
interestingly, if they didn't reject the bill, they would now
be represented in the parliament because this bill was
suggesting for more inclusive rules--electoral rules.
December 2018 was the first ever genuine democratic
election in Armenia. And, as a result of these elections, a new
parliament was formed. And I am honored to be a member of this
parliament. And this assessment is not the assessment of only
the Armenian public, but also the assessment that is reflected
in the OCSE Parliamentary Assembly OSCE ODIHR joint opinion.
And starting from March 2018 in the parliament, we formed a
working group, bipartisan I should emphasize, where members of
all parties represented were tasked with drafting and designing
the changes--electoral changes.
I should--without taking much of the time--I should point
out two things. This working group has prioritized a number of
areas for the reform, including change of political party rule
of law. And on Friday, we had a big public hearing with
participation of all major stakeholders, discussing the ways we
can liberalize the rules for party organization in Armenia and
increase transparency because we consider this as an important
measure for anticorruption.
I should conclude with stating that we have no illusions
that the task of creating strong and democratic institutions,
it is not easy. And there will be a lot of challenges ahead.
But there are also no illusions that this may be the last
chance for our generation to achieve this very important task
of building strong, democratic statehood in Armenia, which is
the only way that Armenia can enable Armenia to meet its
challenges within and outside.
I want to say that this is a big struggle of a small
nation. And this struggle is not about geopolitics. This story
is about people who wish to restore the sovereignty and are
doing their best to make their homeland a place where they can
pursue their happiness, with the respect of human rights and
freedoms. And this is the struggle that we all hoped to have
had during the past decade.
I hope later we will have a chance to discuss many more
specific directions of the reforms that are happening in
Armenia, but I will give the floor now.
Thank you.
Mr. Veasey. Mr. Danielyan, thank you very much for your
testimony.
And now I'm going to invite Arsen Kharatyan. He is the
founder and editor-in-chief of AliQ Media. And just a reminder,
you don't have to read all of your remarks, but to try to keep
them brief enough so that we can have a chance to hear from
everybody, and perhaps even have questions from the
commissioners and other of the dais.
Thank you.
MR. ARSEN KHARATYAN, FOUNDER AND EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, ALIQ MEDIA
Mr. Kharatyan. Thank you, Congressman.
I want to thank Chairman Veasey and Helsinki Commission for
organizing this important hearing. And I want to thank, of
course, the members of the Armenian Caucus, who I've known for
over a decade myself. Thank you very much, once again, for
putting Armenia and our democratic process in Washington and on
the agenda.
Briefly about myself--I grew up in Armenia and got engaged
in civic activism as a young student at a young age. In 2008,
after the disputed presidential elections that saw then-
President Serzh Sargsyan come to power, many of us were
arrested, including the current prime minister and many of the
political elite currently in power, harassed to an extent that
we were, and I was forced to leave the country. But it wasn't
all that bad. I found my wife, Ms. Sonia Shahrigian, here, who
was born across the river in Virginia and who currently works
for the U.S. Government, and has been working for the last
decade.
Her job took us to Georgia, the country of Georgia, which
is also getting quite a lot of support from the U.S., which I
believe is a very important thing to do. I, myself, worked at
Voice of America and had the opportunity to interview many of
you, including Congressman Pallone here and Congresswoman
Jackie Speier, many times, especially when it came to
discussions on the Armenian genocide resolution.
And I remember one of these times, where my journalist
colleagues were here and we were discussing the resolution in
2009 at the Foreign Relations Committee, which was quite tough
work. It took 8 hours and there were parliamentarians back then
from Turkey, from Armenia, including the current Ambassador to
the United States, who was a DCM [deputy chief of mission] back
then, Mr. Varuzhan Nersesyan, who I want to thank for being
here with us.
Anyways, I will shortly talk about the revolution that we
went through. This was by large a revolution of values. This
was by large a revolution in aspiration for a democratic state
that our country and our nation has been struggling with for a
long time. This was a homegrown revolution, obviously. This is
an internal process, by large.
But this would not have been possible without the great
support that the Armenian civil society and media have been
receiving from the United States as well. For a number of
years, this country has been supporting democratic institutions
in our country, including my great colleague Miriam Lanskoy,
who will be speaking here through the National Endowment for
Democracy, which has been supporting many of the young civil
society groups, including the media organizations, for many
years, for which I want to thank. And I want to see the
continuation of that.
So for the last three decades, our nation experienced great
challenges. From military conflict in Nagorno Karabakh, which
of course the Congressmen and Congresswomen here know very
well, to massive economic decline, a transition from the Soviet
centralized to a market economy with a continued blockade of
our two borders by our two neighbors in the east and in the
west. Since our independence in 1991, our people never stopped
their struggle for their fundamental freedoms, civil and
electoral rights. We do realize that the path to freedom is not
an easy one. It is a bumpy road. But in our view, Armenia and
the Armenian people have no other choice but to have a country
with fully functioning democratic state institutions and a
strong civil society.
While Armenia's nonviolent Velvet Revolution is yet another
example of great positive transformation and a hope for
democracy for the world at this time of crisis, I have to admit
that there are a great deal of challenges we have to deal with.
The new democratically elected administration of our country,
headed by the leader of our revolution and currently the Prime
Minister of Armenia, Nikol Pashinyan, has introduced its reform
agenda with a big emphasis on fighting against corruption,
building state institutions, ensuring fundamental freedoms and
liberties of our citizens.
While, the current Civil Contract ruling party, or the
faction called My Step, which is represented by my great friend
Hamazasp Danielyan here, received a very high vote of
confidence, over 70 percent, in December 2018, the new
administration in Yerevan is now dealing with fundamental
changes in the state governance in order to ensure the
prosperity of its citizens and security for the state. Years of
corrupt governance eroded the state apparatus, creating an
oligarchic and a kleptocratic system where all of the resources
of the country were utilized to benefit a tiny minority of
strongman and criminals.
To change an almost failed state to a functioning system of
governance is not an easy task. And we expect the United States
to stand by the Armenian people, as it has done since our
independence. Since the early 1990s, the American people
supported Armenia in its path to democracy, market economy, and
helped build a strong civil society, as I mentioned before. I
would like to note that this continued support has been
instrumental in our success before, during, and hopefully after
this Velvet Revolution.
Since its inception, the democratically elected parliament
and the government of Armenia have announced a wide range of
reforms and a fight against corruption. I can state that at
this point, systemic corruption in the country is practically
eliminated. And that said, the prime minister and the
government, no one in the ruling party has been or can be
spotted for being involved in anything related to corruption.
The political elite, which came to power as a result of the
revolution through free and fair elections, is a group of young
and educated idealists, who are true believers of fundamental
human rights and have the best intentions to make their country
a fully functioning democracy.
However, it is evident, that good intentions are not enough
for changes of this scale, so we do need your assistance at
this critical time. The Government of Armenia has announced its
policy of fighting against corruption, which will soon be
adopted by the country's parliament. The policy includes a wide
range of changes in the areas of judiciary, tax and customs,
reforming police and public security system, as well as
education, health care, and social security. The United States
can and has already showed interest in supporting the Armenian
Government in all of these areas. However, it would be a great
sign of support from Washington if this interest translated
into concrete actions.
While with the great help of the friends of the Armenian
Caucus at the U.S. Congress, the financial aid to Armenia has
doubled for the next year. Earmarking the funds allocated to
our country, like it is done with our neighbors Georgia and
Ukraine, would be a great sign of wider political support.
Meanwhile, in my view, from aid to trade should be the
philosophy of Washington, DC with regards to Armenia. Hence,
making Overseas Private Investment Corporation, the OPIC funds,
larger, like it is, again, in the case of Georgia and Ukraine,
would encourage American businesses to enter the Armenian
market with more interest and confidence.
Last but not least, supporting Armenia in the area of
security can and should be discussed further. Our military's
present in Afghanistan and Iraq within the framework of NATOs
Partnership for Peace program. Considering the unresolved
conflict in Nagorno Karabakh and the changing security
architecture of our region, continued and deeper training of
our security forces is of crucial importance. So this is an
area where U.S. support would be greatly appreciated--really
appreciated.
That said, you should also raise your expectations of what
Armenia and the Armenian people can and should do in the months
and years ahead. You should not explain or excuse away our
failures because of geopolitics or the legacies of the past.
Yes, Armenia's challenges are decades in the making, but just
like the people's apathy and seemingly all-powerful political
monolith, the challenges can be overcome and resolved. Much is
at stake, and we have got to get this right. The people who
believed in themselves and the strength of the universal ideals
of freedom, fairness, and pursuit of happiness deserve it all.
I once again thank this commission for organizing this
important hearing and will be happy to address your questions.
Mr. Veasey. Thank you very much for your testimony, Mr.
Kharatyan. I really appreciate that.
And now the program director at Union of Informed Citizens,
Mr. Daniel Ioannisian, who will begin his testimony now. Mr.
Ioannisian.
MR. DANIEL IOANNISIAN, PROGRAM DIRECTOR, UNION OF INFORMED
CITIZENS
Mr. Ioannisian. Thank you very much, Chairman Veasey. This
is a great honor for me to appear here in front of you and to
give testimony regarding democratic transition in Armenia.
For decades, democratic institutions were being
systematically destroyed in Armenia. All the state bodies
forcefully served a group of people who kept power through
rigged elections. Extensive propaganda and total apathy were
also helping that group keep the power. This situation was an
example of state capture. Expressing their discontent toward
yet another attempt to violate democracy, and desiring to
counteract corruption, the people of Armenia made a democratic
and peaceful revolution last year. As a result of the
revolution, people who lost power did not lose the very big
amount of financial and media resources they had. With the
obvious support from Russia, they started active propaganda
against liberal democracy, setting it against security.
That propaganda is so active that it makes the authorities
step back from the ideology of liberal democracy, which they
share, I'm pretty sure. And the authorities are doing so to
prove that they do respect the importance of security as well.
And here, I don't mean the real security. I mean nationalistic
and hoorah-patriotic rhetoric.
Currently, Armenia needs to consolidate its democracy so
that the values of liberal democracy are not compromised. For
that reason, support to the developments of democratic
institutions is important, but it's not enough. As I already
noted, the representatives of the former government--the former
corrupt government--are trying to stop the democratic
transformation by all means they can. These groups continue to
own huge financial resources and they act very efficiently in
the cyber and information space. And they are backed up by
Russia.
I should note that in this respect, it will be very
efficient to freeze the illegally obtained assets of those who
have committed crime-related offenses in Armenia, to freeze it
everywhere in the world, and including in the United States. Of
course, this all should be done with full respect of human
rights and fundamental freedoms.
But neutralization of corrupt representatives of the former
government is not enough. It is also important to support
making the democratic transition in Armenia more complete and
comprehensive. It is crucial that the independent justice
system and efficient law enforcement develop in Armenia. One of
the weaknesses of the law enforcement system in this respect is
the lack of capacity to fight against corruption, organized
crime, and cybercrime. The capacities of the law enforcement
and judicial system in this sector are so weak, that very often
they are not able to institute criminal prosecution based on
the investigations already conducted by investigative
journalists or other watchdogs. As a result, the
representatives of the former corrupt government violate laws,
commit financial and cybercrimes, and conduct large-scale
campaigns against democratic reforms, but remain largely
unpunished only because the capacities of law enforcement, the
prosecutor's office, and the independence of courts are not
enough to respond to these criminal activities.
Although Armenian authorities share democratic values and
human rights, they are quite inexperienced. And due to this
factor, the former corrupt regime manages to force the
authorities to slow down the institutional reforms by setting,
as I mentioned, security against liberal democracy and
affecting public opinion. It is also important to note that
with respect to higher efficiency of reforms and not
compromising the ideas of liberal democracy, it is crucial that
the process of reforms should be inclusive, and nonprofit
organizations which have promoted democratic values for years
or decades are actively involved in it.
Today, Armenia has an exclusive and unique opportunity to
put the principles of liberal democracy on institutional basis.
To reach that goal, support should be provided to Armenia in
terms of becoming more independent from Russia. It is no secret
to anyone in this room that Russia does not like any
democratization process in its neighborhood, or anywhere in the
world. And the independence from Russia can grow if nonnatural
gas-based generation of electricity and other infrastructures
will develop in Armenia. The first will assist to reducing the
influence of Russian natural gas, and the second will help in
bringing back Armenian working migrants from Russia, since they
also serve as a pressure tool for Kremlin when needed.
Support to institutional reforms should be not only
financial, but also it should be as sharing of experience.
There are very good examples. Maybe mentioning the Ukrainian
example is not the best idea in these days here, but still, the
experience that was shared in Ukrainian anticorruption bodies
was quite useful.
Thank you very much, and I'll be happy to answer any
questions.
Mr. Veasey. Thank you very much, Mr. Ioannisian. I really
appreciate that.
And now we're going to have Miriam Lanskoy, who is the
senior director of the National Endowment for Democracy. I want
to remind the witnesses that their full testimonies will be
entered into the record. And please feel free to summarize your
testimony in the interest of time.
Ms. Lanskoy.
MS. MIRIAM LANSKOY, SENIOR DIRECTOR, NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR
DEMOCRACY
Ms. Lanskoy. Thank you very much, Chairman Veasey, and
other members of the commission. Thank you for having this
hearing. And it's a great honor to be here to speak about the
reform in Armenia.
The National Endowment for Democracy is a congressionally
funded private foundation which is dedicated to the growth and
strengthening of democratic institutions around the world. NED
has been working continuously in Armenia since the mid-1990s.
We've supported a wide range of programs for this entire
period. And since the revolution, we have seen the transition
in Armenia as a major regional priority. We do view Armenia
similarly to Ukraine and Georgia as a major priority. And I
want to join others who have said that it should be approached
in a similar manner, through USG funding to be accelerated in a
similar way.
Armenia's Velvet Revolution is an authentic democratic
breakthrough. It's a historic opportunity to build a more just
system. And it presents many opportunities for deepening
relations with the United States.
Having said that, and with sort of all due respect to my
colleagues, the change has been slow to materialize. Prime
Minister Nikol Pashinyan has been prime minister since May 2018
and the newly democratic Parliament has been there since
January 2019. Over the last few months, we are starting to see
some of the reforms take shape. And as already has been
mentioned, particularly in the areas of anticorruption,
judicial reform, and electoral law.
They're only a year into a 5-year term. So, there's still a
lot of time and their popularity is very high with the Armenian
people. So this new government does represent a very popular
aspiration for democracy. They have 70-80 percent support
throughout the last couple of years. No one doubts their values
or their intentions.
I think there are two issues. One issue is of a
philosophical nature. These people are idealists, committed to
democratic principles and want to be cautious, and don't want
to see drastic, rapid transformation. Another type of issue is
a kind of overreliance on the executive, which is typical of
the post-Soviet space, where the office of the prime minister
is the seat of all power. And that is consistent across time
and space everywhere in the post-Soviet area.
However, for democracy to flourish, the other branches,
particularly the Parliament and the courts, also have to come
into their own. And in Armenia, I would say the major
opportunity is the Parliament. As has already been mentioned by
Congresswoman Speier, it's a freshman Parliament. One hundred
and one parliamentarians are in their first term. These are
young people. They are well-educated, they're worldly. They are
really the future of this country. And the more that we can do
to build up the capacity of the Parliament and enable it to
play a stronger role in reform in the future, the better. NDI
and IRI are already there, with some support from AID and some
from NED. But more can be done, especially building up
commission staff and various professional staff, like a
research service for the Parliament.
NED has prioritized media assistance and countering
disinformation. As has already been noted, the media space is
still largely controlled by oligarchs, particularly television.
They are close to Russia. This is a major destabilizing force
in Armenia. New TV licenses are not yet available. They might
be in a year or so. At the moment, what we're doing is focusing
on building capacity of independent online media that have a
strong audience and have a strong editorial line and can, in
time, transition to television when that opportunity is
available.
More could be done to provide training and to provide
different opportunities for independent media to emerge, as
well as to help the public broadcaster and also to help the
government develop communications strategies. There's an
overreliance on social media. This was a social media
revolution. And the people in government too often are sucked
into kind of social media storms. And there could be more to
help professionalize the way that government officials,
parliamentarians, work with the public and with the media. So,
there are many areas where the U.S. can offer support through
programs, and to really help develop a more robust democracy.
Finally, the last thing I want to mention is that Armenia
has put its former president, Robert Kocharian, on trial. This
is a huge, huge achievement. It's a big deal. No former
president in the former Soviet space--some have been removed,
but none have gone to trial. Kocharian is a friend of Putin's.
No one would have thought that Armenia would be able to do
this. And this goes back to what Mr. Danielyan mentioned, the
killings in 2008. Kocharian is being held responsible for those
killings.
But there are enormous problems because the constitutional
court is made up almost entirely of Kocharian's appointees. So
they have voted, the constitutional court has held that he
enjoys immunity. This is an extremely important and difficult
process that Armenia is going through. And there's a lot of
questions about whether an authoritarian constitution, an
authoritarian juridical system, an authoritarian constitutional
court could actually deliver justice in a pivotal case like
this. And we're seeing now a complex process of trying to bring
about that justice.
And just in closing, again, Pashinyan and My Step remain
very, very popular. They have four more years in their mandate.
And all of society is really hoping that they do build
systematic and real institutional reform.
Thank you.
Mr. Veasey. Ms. Lanskoy, thank you very much for your
testimony.
And now I would like to recognize Mr. Jonathan D. Katz. He
is the senior fellow the German Marshall Fund.
Mr. Katz, thank you very much.
MR. JONATHAN D. KATZ, SENIOR FELLOW, GERMAN MARSHALL FUND
Mr. Katz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the
commission, Congressman Pallone, others, particularly the
chairs of the Armenia Caucus. And I want to just applaud them
for the recent visit to Armenia. I get a sense from Armenian
leaders that they'd love to have more visibility with U.S.
officials at a much higher level. And so your visit there is
really incredibly important to that effort.
I want to just thank you [for being] on this panel today
with really some very distinguished colleagues. But I want to
praise the colleagues who've come here from Armenia, because
they were on the frontline of democracy, making the change
happen. And so I just want to applaud you for your efforts, and
your leadership to be part of really a transformative moment in
Armenia.
I think, as was pointed out, in an era where we've seen
democratic backsliding occurring in too many countries across
Europe, Armenia stands out as a nation bucking this disturbing
trend. Despite economic, political, security and geostrategic
challenges, Armenia has forged ahead. I think you all deserve a
lot of credit for those changes. These challenges, as we know,
are particularly acute when you consider closed borders,
Yerevan's delicate balancing act between Russia and the West,
and what had up until recently been fairly weak democratic
progress in Armenia since independence in 1991. When I look at
Armenia, this is the government that has, I think, the biggest
commitment and the best chance to really truly form democracy
in Armenia since 1991. And I hope we take advantage of that.
Now, Armenia's undergone a truly historic transformation
following its Velvet Revolution in the spring of 2018 that has
ushered in an unparalleled opportunity for democratic and
judicial reforms that had been stymied by the previous
governments. Last December's Parliamentary election and
sweeping victory for the prime minister and his coalition has
created unprecedented conditions for the Armenian Government to
act quickly on the Velvet Revolution demands. In effect, they
have a mandate to make these changes and to do them.
I appreciate what Miriam has said about the speed of those
reforms and the need for the government to move forward. That
even with high popularity ratings, that I think any politician
would be envious of, there's still a period in which the public
will look back and say whether or not their hopes and
aspirations, those that were played out in the Velvet
Revolution, actually come to fruition. And I will just say that
I've seen this other--where you're talking about the Maidan in
Ukraine, where you have these high expectations of the public,
and at times you don't necessarily have the government in place
to carry out those reforms. I think in Armenia, you do.
And Miriam mentioned, I think, one of the largest problems
that they have in doing this is the judicial system itself,
which is an impediment--which is often an impediment in a
number of countries in the region. Moldova recently went
through this same exact challenge with its judicial system. And
you see these same type of challenges in Ukraine today, where a
new high anticorruption court was just formed as a means, in
effect, to rebuild a judicial system to address corruption. So
these challenges are deep. But at this point in time, these are
really unprecedented conditions of the Armenian Government to
carry out reforms.
Notwithstanding this transformation, we know that these
reforms are incomplete. The government's been in place. We know
that the prime minister took over shortly after the Velvet
Revolution, but also he didn't have a parliament with him
capable of carrying out reforms until January of this year. So
we're on to about month number 10 to carry out reforms in a
system that was incredibly corrupt. And those vestiges remain.
And so I think, on one hand, there needs to be speed, but
also we need to recognize that these things will take time. And
even in the best of circumstances, if you look across this
region, it will take a number of years before reforms are not
only passed, but implemented. And that's really important for
partners of Armenia that are thinking about supporting Armenia
or thinking about, as you're talking about, legislation and
about how best to support this.
So helping Armenia to succeed is not only important for our
meetings themselves, but I also want to just point out that
it's really important for U.S. and European efforts to advance
democracy, combat kleptocracy and illiberalism across Europe,
Eurasia, and globally. And I think this is so important.
The Helsinki Commission has been at the forefront of this
for years to address these challenges; even recently held
hearings. It's a challenge that we're facing globally. And in
Armenia--success there is such an important thing for others,
both in its region and globally. So we know this is in the
interest of the United States for this to succeed.
Armenia's revolution, which no one could have predicted, is
an opportunity for Armenians to break free of entrenched
corruption that has held back this nation politically and
economically, and put the future of this nation of 3 million in
the hands of its people. I want to applaud the Armenian
Government's reform plan, which is to be commended, which
focuses on the key importance of democracy, development of
democratic institutions, rule of law, equality before the law
for all, the existence of an independent judiciary, and an
introduction of effective mechanisms of checks and balances.
It was mentioned earlier too how important this is,
especially with a new Parliament in place, that you don't want
to--in Armenia or in this region--to have power concentrated in
one body and one hand. And hopefully the work that you're doing
will help them move forward in that direction.
So, for Armenia to carry out this ambitious agenda, it's
incredibly important for partners of Armenia, including the
U.S., the Helsinki Commission, and Congress, to support this
transformation by providing necessary assistance and resources
and working with the Armenian people, civil society and
government.
U.S. policy toward Armenia should also include a strategy
that greatly enhances Armenia's independence, which we haven't
talked as much about today, and expands its political,
economic, security and energy options. Russia was mentioned
briefly by one of our speakers. And if you look down the line
at the dependence of Armenia on Russia in a number of sectors,
you know this is a challenge. But it's important that Armenians
should be free and independent to determine their own future
domestically and internationally.
Commissioners, and Members of Congress, your continued
leadership in this effort is critical twofold. First, your
leadership is needed as legislation and assistance for Armenia
currently making its way through Congress is passed and ensure
that the assistance is funded and targeted appropriately. And I
think this is really important. It was mentioned that USAID and
the U.S. Government has pivoted over the last year. And I think
that's really important. But even the passage of legislation
and passage of new funding for Armenia has to be followed all
the way to the end point as well.
And I'll just say that we've seen a real change in the
language of how the U.S. Government is engaging directly with
our Armenian counterparts. And I think this is really
important. As many of you know, there is an ongoing process
over the last year called the U.S.-Armenia Strategic Dialogue,
which was to discuss cooperation on strategic reforms and
promoting shared democratic values and deepening cooperation.
And this is really important--it was meant as an effort by the
U.S. Government to recognize that the relationship has changed,
that things in Armenia have changed.
And so I think the most important thing we can do is to
continue to encourage that type of cooperation. USAID has
launched a number of new initiatives and projects over the last
year, one on energy security, one on good governance, and
others dealing with economic reforms and economic growth. Those
are going to be critical to continue.
The other aspect too is that the U.S. is not the only
country that's providing support for Armenia. There's an
agreement with the European Union, a comprehensive agreement,
called CEPA. The EU provides 40 million euros annually and
share some of the same goals and objectives of the United
States in this space. It would be incumbent on the U.S. to work
more closely with the EU and Armenia, and also to continue to
try to provide the resources to help support Armenia's growth.
We can get more deeply into some of the details of this,
because I know we've got a short time. I just want to thank the
commission again for the opportunity to speak today.
Thank you.
Mr. Veasey. Mr. Katz, thank you very much.
And I'd like to now take the time to recognize Mr. Pallone.
He needs to leave soon. But he does have some questions that
he'd like to ask. I recognize Mr. Pallone to speak.
I do want to acknowledge Representative Sheila Jackson Lee
from the 18th Congressional District in Texas. Thank you for
joining us.
Ms. Jackson Lee. Thank you.
Mr. Veasey. Mr. Pallone.
Mr. Pallone. Well, thank you, Mr. Veasey. I apologize. I
feel bad going in front of the other commissioners.
But I'll be brief. I'm going to ask three questions, and
two of them of Ms. Lanskoy. Right? And I apologize to Mr.
Danielyan and the others from Armenia, but I got a chance to
talk to you in Armenia. So I want to ask them something.
[Laughs.]
One was about the media and the other was about the role of
parliament. And in each case, these were things that we
discussed with the Armenian MPs when we were in Armenia a few
weeks ago. And you talked about the media. And, of course, they
were very concerned, the MPs, about the fact that the media
continues to be controlled by the oligarchs and by the forces
of the previous government, essentially.
And they had asked that when they came here to meet with us
in November, that we set up a meeting with the FCC, our Federal
Communications Commission, because they were basically saying,
What can we do to set up some kind of a structure with regard
to the media?
Now, you mentioned problems with licensing. You talked
about moving to a more independent online. How could we be
helpful? Like, what is the role of the FCC, for example, in the
U.S. that doesn't exist in Armenia that we could use in
preparation for this meeting to say what we could do?
I know they've heard about the FCC, but they weren't too
specific about exactly how that could be emulated or whatever.
You want to talk about that?
Ms. Lanskoy. Yes. Thank you for that question.
I don't necessarily have a good answer in terms of whether
the FCC itself as a model would be correct here. But there
needs to be a strategy for how to approach fairly the question
of licensing broadcasters. That could be the FCC. That could be
other places that have had successful----
Mr. Pallone. Is part of it----
Ms. Lanskoy. ----transitions.
Mr. Pallone. I'm trying to remember. I think a lot of it
was they were concerned about transparency and ownership. In
other words, here, when you own a station there's transparency
of ownership, which doesn't necessarily exist in Armenia.
Ms. Lanskoy. Oh, so transparency of ownership is a key
issue. And that's something that could be put in place, I would
think, more easily than the whole question--you have to come up
with some fair process for which stations are going to continue
to have licenses and which ones shouldn't, right, and on what
basis you would award new licenses.
But you absolutely should be able to--and this was done in
Georgia, frankly. There was a long time when it was not well
documented, and you understood that there were intermediary
owners and you could never get to the bottom of who actually
owned a station. That should not be so complicated to do. And
we could come up with examples of where that has been done.
Mr. Pallone. All right. I know----
Ms. Lanskoy. I mean, I think there are others.
Mr. Pallone. I've got to be brief because I want to get to
two other things, but go ahead. Arsen, if you want to just----
Mr. Kharatyan. I just wanted to pick up, Congressman,
because it is an important and pressing question. Currently the
Parliament is discussing the new law on media. And in 2021, we
have the frequency competition coming up. They're looking at
different models of how you can limit one person from owning 50
percent of the public TV frequencies.
Mr. Pallone. Okay.
Mr. Kharatyan. So they're going to limit the ability for
one or two owners who own, let's say, three, four available
frequencies. If they want to have it in the private space,
that's fine. But I just wanted to point out----
Mr. Pallone. No, I appreciate that. And, Mr. Veasey, we'll
continue with this.
But let me get in my second question, because I have three
and these guys are going to get tired of hearing from me.
Second one is you talked about the role of the Parliament
versus the executive. Now, of course, we have that problem here
increasingly too, so I don't know that I want to use the U.S.
as an example; but, in other words, having professional and
research staff, which, of course, we do in the Congress. Just
develop that a little more for me, how that can make a
difference.
Ms. Lanskoy. If I'm not mistaken, there's almost no
professional staff. There's a dozen professional staff in
Parliament. Is that right? So there's a woeful lack of staff.
And the idea that members such as yourselves could cover all of
those areas, especially when there is time pressure--so when I
say that reforms need to come quickly, I also understand that
there's this whole range of problems. And, yes, there's no
committee staff. There's hardly any personal staff.
Mr. Pallone. Do you want to say something quickly, Mr.
Danielyan?
Mr. Danielyan. Very quickly, I want to reflect, because the
speed of reforms is directly related to the capacity of the
parliament. And we should be aware that we are talking about an
institution that we inherited that used to be a rubber-stamp
parliament that was there simply to ratify whatever came from
the executive, while, from the day one it was announced that
the political reforms are going to be designed in the
Parliament. And for this we need capacity. And oftentimes the
speed--for example, including the working group that I'm
coordinating--depends on the lack of institutional capacity and
processes.
Mr. Pallone. Sure.
Mr. Danielyan. I should recognize also here the support--
the certain level of support that we are getting from USAID
programs----
Mr. Pallone. That too.
Mr. Danielyan. ----in terms of electoral affairs, I have
mentioned; IRI, for example, in terms of conducting evidence-
based policy reforms. They are in Armenia doing public-opinion
polls. Once I return to Armenia, we are going to have town-hall
meetings to discuss this--with the support of IRI to discuss
these changes in the law, political parties. But a separate,
well-designed intervention that would support institutionally
the Armenian Parliament, we very much appreciated because
that's also defining the pace of the reforms in Armenia.
Mr. Pallone. And we can talk about this when the MPs come
over here in November.
But my last question was for Mr. Ioannisian. Almost
everything that I mentioned, as Mr. Veasey knows, comes under
our committee, of course. These are things that relate to our
Energy and Commerce Committee.
But you talked about independence for energy and dependence
on Russian natural gas. What would you have us do? In other
words, we're the energy committee, Energy and Commerce. We have
had set up programs with Israel, for example, for energy
independence. What would you have us do to move in the
direction you're suggesting of less dependence on natural gas,
and therefore less dependence on Russia?
Mr. Ioannisian. Thank you very much, Mr. Congressman. If I
could also to say a few words about the media.
So, in Armenia, there is no way to run a profit-making
media outlet because the market is small, and other reasons.
For that reason, all the media outlets that are independent,
they are supported by the West generally, mainly by the United
States. It is by the National Endowment for Democracy. This is
why the State Department and Open Society Foundations are also
very active. But if we want to have more independent media in
Armenia, this media should be directly supported.
Regarding your question on independence from the viewpoint
of energy sector, I should mention that one-third of
electricity in Armenia is produced by natural gas. Also, we
have a nuclear power plant which is producing approximately
one-third of electricity----
Mr. Pallone. And a lot of the MPs mentioned hydropower too.
Mr. Ioannisian. Yes. And the rest one-third is hydropower.
But the nuclear power plant should be shut down probably in
more or less 7 years. It cannot work forever. And, because
hydropower is quite limited and it can't be kind of raised,
this will lead to have more portion of electricity produced by
natural gas. And the natural-gas monopoly in Armenia belongs to
Gazprom Armenia, which 100 percent belongs to Gazprom.
So to have more independence in energy sector, we will need
other sources of electricity.
Mr. Pallone. Are we talking about renewables? Solar? Wind?
What are we talking about?
Mr. Ioannisian. It could be a power--nuclear power plant.
It could be solar. I don't think that wind will work in
Armenia. I'm not sure. Solar could work. Now, there are some
programs supported by European Union for householders to have
solar-power panels. But also--solar-power panels are quite
limited and the efficiency is quite limited. So----
Mr. Pallone. I mean, it seems to me--Mr. Veasey, I know
you're from oil country, so I have to be careful. [Laughs.]
He's from Texas, you know.
Mr. Veasey. [Off mic.]
Mr. Pallone. [Laughs.] But what I was saying is we did
something with Israel on energy, cooperation. Maybe we could do
something similar with Armenia and look into that.
Mr. Danielyan. Congressman, quickly----
Mr. Pallone. Go ahead.
Mr. Danielyan. ----if I may add, as Daniel mentioned, yes,
by large we are dependent on gas from Russia. And the other
source is Iran, if you remember. And that is----
Mr. Pallone. Oh, sure.
Mr. Danielyan. ----another. And you don't pick your
geography, as they say. So solar is the way to go. I will just
mention this. In one of the regions near Lake Sevan, there was
research that showed that it has the largest number of solar
energy throughout the year, over 300 days. And I think the
Government of Armenia has prioritized solar to be the way to
move forward. The key part of it is to be able to sustain it
within and not import the panels or anything else. So,
producing the solar panels and making some kind of a chain of
sustainability might be a key area to look into.
Mr. Pallone. Okay, thank you.
Mr. Katz. Can I just add, too? I mean, just on energy,
there is ongoing U.S. Government cooperation with Armenia on
energy. One of the issues has been trying to connect Armenia
back to back with Georgia on electricity and then connecting it
to the wider European energy market.
What that will take, though, which is really important, is
that the U.S. Government has gone in to provide resources for
legal and regulatory changes that are needed for Armenia to
comply with EU energy laws. And that really is important. That
connection is important. It's what we've been trying to do both
with Moldova and Ukraine as well. It's to try to connect them
to safer energy partners and provide some real security. But I
think it's----
Mr. Pallone. You know, one of the----
Mr. Katz. ----happening right now.
Mr. Pallone. Well, one of the things that we used to have--
and I'm going back; Mr. Veasey won't remember because he's too
young, I don't know if anybody in this audience will remember,
but there was a time when we had, through the Appropriations
Committee, a--I don't know what it was called--but it was like
a trans-Caucasus pot of money. It was set aside every year in
the appropriations process for the Caucasus. And it could only
be tapped if two of the three countries cooperated. It was
Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan.
And it was set up as a way of trying to create cooperation
and lessen tension, if you will, between the three Caucasus
countries. And, if Georgia and Armenia got together--it would
be nice if it was Azerbaijan too, but that's less likely--then,
we'd get the funding for that. And it could have been like a
water project or an energy project or whatever. We should
probably look into something like that again, because that
would be also a cooperative effort in the Caucasus that could
be a source of funding that brings the countries together.
Mr. Katz. Absolutely. And I think Georgia is a good example
of a country that was greatly dependent on Russia and has
completely removed that dependency on Russia through other
means. Georgia is such an important partner for Armenia,
particularly in this energy sector. And I agree. I think the
resource levels that USAID has been working with and the U.S.
Government are probably not sufficient enough to move the
needle completely. So it's an area that should be looked at.
Mr. Pallone. And I don't mean to suggest--I'll end, because
I took up too much time, but I don't mean to suggest in all of
this that somehow Armenia shouldn't be cooperating with Russia,
because I know that that's necessary for military and security
purposes as well. But I don't like to see the oligarchs control
the energy sector or the media sector or anything, because it's
not just a Russian issue; it's an oligarch issue. And it's
antidemocratic. So that's important too.
Thank you, my colleague.
Mr. Veasey. Chairman Pallone, thank you very much. I
appreciate you joining us today.
And I have a few questions myself that I wanted to ask.
Mine specifically revolves around corruption, because I know
that has been an issue in a lot of former Soviet States and
regions in being able to move forward, quite frankly. And I've
visited the Ukraine and have seen it personally myself and know
that that was something there that came up over and over again,
and know that it's been an issue here. But I know that this new
government has adopted a new national anticorruption strategy,
and I was just wondering if you might be able to update us.
Maybe Mr. Katz or Mr. Ioannisian, if you could update us on
what are the key goals of this national strategy on
anticorruption, and what is the status of this implementation?
Mr. Ioannisian. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I should
say that the anticorruption strategy was prepared during the
last 5 months, maybe 6 months. The preparation process was
quite inclusive. Civil society actors were involved in
discussions.
So basically there are a few main things. First is that
we're going to have, finally, a specialized law enforcement
body [that] probably is going to be called Anticorruption
Committee, which will fight criminal offenses of corruption.
This body will include us investigators who will investigate
the cases, but also it will include intelligence bodies who
will find the cases.
It is also important that we will have comparatively new
regulations regarding illegal enrichment, illicit enrichment,
which is also a very efficient way to fight corruption. So
also--beneficial ownership of mining sector is very important
that we will have probably next year. This is also very
important issue for transparency and for preventing corruption
regarding mining sector.
There are many issues, I'm not aware of all the details
because the document is more than 50 pages, but I'll be happy
to provide it later.
Thank you.
Mr. Katz. I was going to suggest to you that a member of
parliament who is sort of pushing this through right now would
have a good sense on the exact timing of what's going to happen
next.
Mr. Danielyan. Thank you. Well, I would just want to add
certain directions that are part of the strategy. It's
including, well, strengthened, enhanced institutional capacity
to fight corruption with the revision of the whole
institutions, and this commission will be tasked--we have a
broader mandate and toolkit. For example, in the Parliament we
are discussing that also financial oversight of political
parties should be part of this institution, and there are
successful cases from post-Soviet space where this is
implemented. Other things that are part of the strategy is a
mechanism for stolen asset recovery, strengthening of
whistleblower protection, increased transparency and
accountability of public offices and enhanced integrity through
comprehensive declaration of assets and interests, and as well
as anticorruption education and awareness raising. So it's a
quite comprehensive strategy.
Mr. Veasey. Thank you.
Mr. Ioannisian. Mr. Chairman, if I just add, sir, that
regarding stolen assets recovery, I guess the United States of
America can be very good ally for this reform in Armenia,
because I'm pretty sure that many stolen assets are kept in
United States.
And the second thing regarding Anticorruption Committee, it
would be very useful if the FBI or other law enforcements from
United States would share their experience, would train these
new law enforcement bodies, because such trainings were very
useful in other post-Soviet countries.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Veasey. Thank you very much. And I know we've kind of
talked a little bit about corruption and judicial reform. Was
there something--because obviously we weren't there, and I
don't know what all was said during the campaign, and it may be
better if you want to put members of Parliament on the spot--
but I just wanted to know, were there some things, any promises
that--maybe Ms. Lanskoy--any promises that were made during the
campaign that are going to be hard--obviously, although there
are going to be challenges for any promises to be kept, but if
there are some that are going to maybe be more tough than
others that we should be concerned at--looking at them down the
road?
Ms. Lanskoy. I think it's going to be tough to deliver. The
expectations are very high. Pashinyan made sweeping promises
also about economic growth with--and growth of the population,
but--that Armenia can flourish over the next several years to
deliver the kind of growth he's talking about.
It's great to set really high expectations and try to reach
them, but whether that's realistic and--what can we do to help
that come to fruition? Can we think through economic strategies
and socioeconomic programs that may keep more Armenians at home
so people don't have to leave the country to find work? Can we
help them think through other kind of growth-oriented reform,
infrastructure projects?
And, of course, rule of law is key to attracting
investment; the kinds of anticorruption plans being discussed,
that's very important in the dialog with the EU that unlocks a
lot of EU funding.
I think these are difficult challenges that they have set
for themselves, and if we can work with them on a number of
them, I think it could be productive. It might not reach the
really high standards that they've set for themselves.
Mr. Katz. Can I just add to this, too? I think with the
challenges that there's these great expectations that have been
made, and turning plans into policy, into law and implementing
it is a huge task. So even with the greatest intentions, it's a
difficult task.
Miriam mentioned earlier, I think that one of the biggest
challenge will be the judiciary, which is connected to the
previous regime. And so, if you're pushing constitutional
reforms and the courts are rejecting those reforms, it's
problematic. If you're prosecuting someone who should be
prosecuted for committing acts of corruption or other acts and
you don't have a judiciary that's independent, it's
problematic. So the vestiges of that old system that's in the
media, that's why it was mentioned before how important it is
for the U.S. to keep funding independent media or other
partners, because that's really the only way in an
unsustainable media market to have independent media, to
continue to do that.
And just last, on Russia and sort of other malign
influence. I think the Congressman's correct--Armenia obviously
has a close relationship with Russia, has to balance that
relationship, but it's really--I think we have to recognize
that when you see Mr. Pashinyan on the one hand--there was a
great picture of him at a recent Eurasia Economic Union event,
a selfie with him and Mr. Putin and other Central Asian leaders
who're part of the Eurasian Economic Union. You know that
they're on sort of different spectrums of democracy--human
rights and sort of corruption. They're representing two
systems. I believe as soon as Russia believes that it's not in
their interest to have this government, they will ratchet up
the pressure on this government. And it's something that will
be a challenge because there's obviously a deep security
relationship and energy relationship. And so we have to take
that into account, that there are other forces that are pushing
in the opposite direction of where the government wants to go.
And last I would just say is new partners like China, it's
so important--I think China is the second-largest trading
partner of Armenia now, and it's important to know that as
China is seeking to invest, that the Armenian Government makes
certain that transparency is part of this process. Even small
countries like Armenia can say that these are our standards.
And that also, as Armenia's corruption is addressed and
people look at Armenia as a market to invest, bringing in more
competition for energy projects, mining and mining projects for
minerals, is really important.
And I just want to say that to you Armenians, it's tough to
get that direct foreign investment, but be careful. The Chinese
investment always comes with the blessing and approval of the
Chinese Government. And I think that in Yerevan, you have the
means to push for the type of transparency that's necessary to
make certain that any investment doesn't come with bad strings.
Mr. Veasey. Please.
Mr. Kharatyan. Just to add to what already has been said,
when it comes to promises and deliverables, this year alone,
this administration has built more roads than the previous one
in the last 3, 4 years--over 300 kilometers of roads, and the
quality hopefully should be assured. That's big, in a country
that was completely corrupt, where physical infrastructure was
so damaged, it was almost impossible to go from one town to
another.
Last year, in 2018, it was the first time for the last 8
years when we had more people coming into the country than
living. We had a very big problem with migration. People were
leaving the country for various reasons and now we have a
surplus.
Foreign debt. For the first time we started paying off our
foreign debt and taking less. In 2018, at least so far, basic
salary has been raised probably in the last 5 years for the
first time, 20 percent. I'm just giving you figures of very
specific reforms that have already been adopted and done using
the state budget. And the number of tourists, if you wish.
Again, it's endless. I've never seen Yerevan, Armenia as lively
as it used to--as in the last decade or so. I mean, it's a
vibrant--it's a happening place, and I'm sure all of us,
including our MPs, are inviting you to visit us the sooner the
better, to see it with your own eyes.
Mr. Veasey. Sir?
Mr. Danielyan. Just a couple of sentences regarding the
expectations and deliverables. Two-thirds of Armenian citizens
are expecting from us, from our government, to resolve economic
and social issues. Those are high in the priorities, maybe up
three, four out of five.
[For me] personally, as a legislator, democratic reform is
No. 1, and that's why I got into the Parliament actually. But
we need to recognize that, in the end, it's about economy and
the economic performance and social needs of the people.
Therefore, for our government to succeed, to be successful in
terms of democratic reforms, institutions, but I think it's
also very important how the economy will be performing for the
next year. And here, that's why I also want to return to the
idea from aid to trade, and also the importance of the United
States to have a role in this regard.
And building upon the invitation, I want to extend it also
as an open invitation to visit Armenia and see the changes and
maybe even the upcoming best occasion might be the elections
that are going to happen--Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, also known
as Artsakh, which are also very important for establishing
democratic institutions there. In March, there is going to be
elections, both for president and also the Parliament, and it
was previously a Congressman from the United States had visited
and observed the elections and the dynamics. I hope we will see
also people during this upcoming March.
Mr. Veasey. Thank you very much.
Mr. Ioannisian. Mr. Chairman, if I may, just two words
about elections in Karabakh.
Mr. Veasey. Yes.
Mr. Ioannisian. Because as a head of an NGO who observed
last local elections in Karabakh of around months ago, I should
say that this is very important. This is not--if someone is
observing those elections, this doesn't mean that this is a
recognition of the dependence of Nagorno-Karabakh. But Nagorno-
Karabakh is in the OSCE region, and people there should feel
the freedoms and rights that anyone in the OSCE region should
feel. And they should have a right to elect their government,
to have good elections. And I guess the international society
should support that.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Veasey. Thank you very much. Well, we have concluded.
I really appreciate everybody's comments and remarks. I
know that the other commissioners that were here and also the
other Members of Congress that were here really enjoyed being
able to ask you some questions.
Well, this is obviously an area of ongoing concern and
observance here in the U.S. Congress and Armenia, and how the
situation there is going. So we appreciate you taking time to
come all the way out here, guests that are here.
Thank you for your expert testimony, and this hearing is
now concluded. [Sounds gavel.]
[Whereupon, at 3:44 p.m., the hearing ended.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
=======================================================================
Prepared Statements
----------
Prepared Statement of Hon. Marc Veasey
Good afternoon and welcome. This U.S. Helsinki Commission
hearing on ``Reform in Armenia: Assessing Progress and
Opportunities for U.S. Policy'' will come to order.
Eighteen months ago, the people of Armenia began marching
in the streets in a massive protest and civil disobedience
movement that would come to be known as Armenia's Velvet
Revolution. Yerevan, Armenia's capital, had seen waves of mass
protest in recent years but no one could have predicted that
this manifestation of popular will would achieve the
transformative change it has so far.
At the beginning of last year, it was difficult to imagine
that the ruling Republican Party of Armenia's grip on power was
so tenuous that it would recede and effectively vanish from
politics in a matter of months after being in power for more
than two decades. What's more, the government's history of
violently suppressing protests meant that demonstrators knew
theirs was a dangerous and inauspicious undertaking.
Few knew these lessons better than Nikol Pashinyan, the
opposition leader at the center of the Velvet Revolution, who
was forced into hiding and jailed after helping organize
protests against the initial election in 2008 of President
Serzh Sargsyan--the very leader he helped depose last year to
become Armenia's current prime minister.
The fact that this revolutionary political change took
place without a shot fired is a testament to the strength,
unity, and discipline of the protest movement as well as to the
responsible decision-making of government officials who
declined to resort to violence to cling to power.
The 2018 protest movement coalesced around the demand to
stop the term-limited President Sargsyan from becoming prime
minister but quickly grew to encompass broader goals: demanding
an end to systemic corruption, respect for the rule of law, and
economic justice. These are the demands that vaulted opposition
legislator and protest leader Nikol Pashinyan to a landslide
victory in parliamentary elections in December 2018.
As we near the one-year anniversary of this historic
election, the Helsinki Commission is convening this hearing to
gauge how the Armenian government is delivering on its
revolutionary promise. What has it achieved so far and where
should it channel its focus in its second year and beyond? We
are interested in how U.S. policy is adjusting to this unique
political opening. Are our assistance levels adequate and are
they properly tailored to promote the freedom, security, and
sovereignty of the Armenian people? And given our mandate as
the Helsinki Commission focused on the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe: how are multilateral
institutions like the OSCE responding?
I am pleased that we have with us today some leaders of the
Congressional Armenian Caucus who have trained their focus on
these questions and introduced appropriations language that
would double U.S. assistance to Armenia for the sake of
bolstering democratic reforms.
I also understand that USAID has responded to the political
transformation in Yerevan by undertaking a strategic
reassessment of its programming in the country: my hope is that
this hearing will generate substantive recommendations for how
to orient USAID's forthcoming programs toward the most critical
reform priorities.
In the realm of multilateral assistance, this Commission is
particularly interested in Armenia's engagement with the OSCE--
the regional security organization this Commission tracks as
part of its statutory obligations. Regrettably, however, OSCE
assistance to Armenia's reform objectives is hamstrung by the
closure of the OSCE's Field Office in Yerevan since 2017 when
the Government of Azerbaijan unilaterally blocked the consensus
required to extend the office's mandate. Without this office,
it is more difficult to maintain regular OSCE engagement with
the Armenian government to develop and implement important
training, capacity-building, and policy development
initiatives.
In response to the OSCE Field Office's closure, the United
States initiated an Armenian Cooperation Program that draws
together voluntary contributions from OSCE participating states
to support OSCE programs in the country. The Armenian
Cooperation Program is contributing to the government's
security and economic reforms, but this partnership should
extend to judicial independence, parliamentary oversight, and
free and fair elections. I hope that this hearing can serve as
an encouragement to our partners in the OSCE to increase their
commitment to Armenia's reform program through contributions to
this U.S.-led initiative. I also hope that Azerbaijani
authorities will reconsider their decision to block the mission
and welcome discussions to reopen it.
Before proceeding further, I would like to thank Helsinki
Commission Chairman Alcee Hastings for the opportunity to chair
today's hearing on an issue of profound importance not only for
the people of Armenia but for the future of democracy and human
rights in Eurasia and the OSCE region as a whole.
At this time, I would like to acknowledge my fellow
Commissioners and members of the Congressional Armenian Caucus
in attendance for any opening remarks they wish to make.
We have assembled an excellent panel to discuss
developments in Armenia and provide their recommendations for
the path forward.
We are honored to have with us from Yerevan a distinguished
parliamentarian from Armenia's National Assembly and member of
the ruling My Step alliance, Hamazasp Danielyan. Mr. Danielyan
spent much of his career working in civil society and managing
democracy promotion programs in Armenia. In the National
Assembly, he serves as the coordinator of the parliamentary
working group on electoral reform.
Next we will hear from Arsen Kharatyan, founder and editor-
in-chief of AliQ Media, an independent Armenian news outlet
based in Tbilisi, Georgia. Mr. Kharatyan is a founding member
of Prime Minister Pashinyan's Civil Contract party and served
as a senior advisor to Pashinyan during the first 100 days of
his tenure as prime minister.
Our third witness, Daniel Ioannisian, is also visiting from
Yerevan where he works as program director for the Union of
Informed Citizens, an NGO focused on developing Armenia's
independent media sector and tackling issues such as
disinformation and media literacy. As a political activist and
civil society leader, Mr. Ioannisian has developed expertise in
many areas of democratic reform and currently serves as
secretary of the parliamentary working group on electoral
reform led by Mr. Danielyan.
After Mr. Ioannisian, we will hear testimony from Miriam
Lanskoy, senior director for Russia and Eurasia at the National
Endowment for Democracy. Ms. Lanskoy has 14 years of experience
studying and supporting democracy promotion in the former
Soviet Union.
Lastly, Jonathan Katz, senior fellow at the German Marshall
Fund, will testify drawing on his considerable experience
managing U.S. assistance programs in the former Soviet Union.
From 2014-2017, he served as deputy assistant administrator at
the U.S. Agency for International Development, where he managed
U.S. development policy, energy security, economic growth, and
democracy, and governance programs in Eastern and Central
Europe and the Black Sea and Caucasus Regions.
I will refer you to the materials in your audience handouts
for the full biographies of our witnesses. Thank you to all our
esteemed witnesses for being with us today. I look forward to
hearing your expert assessments and hereby invite Mr. Danielyan
to begin his testimony.
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jackie Speier
Thank you, Chairman Veasey. I want to thank you and for
holding this crucial hearing on Armenia's peaceful democratic
revolution.
Over the last year and a half, I have watched with
excitement and admiration as Armenia's people have transformed
their government from a staid autocracy to burgeoning
democracy--all without a shot fired. Seared in my mind are the
signature images of Armenia's velvet revolution--hundreds of
thousands of women and men in the streets protesting. Children
blocking the roads with their toy cars. And that defiance
turning into joyful dancing and singing as Armenia's people and
future carried the day.
Two weeks ago, I had the privilege to visit Armenia as a
member of the first dedicated Congressional trip to the country
since the revolution. I could not be more excited, encouraged,
or enthusiastic about the progress I saw.
Armenia's democracy is brand new. 102 of its 132
parliamentarians have never held public office. And its
bureaucrats inexperienced. But, I have good news. They are up
to the challenge. I was blown away by the bright young people
who will define Armenia's next chapter. They have much work to
do: building political parties, reforming institutions, and
writing and implementing laws. But they're up to the challenge.
Armenia's young people are brilliant, engaged, and capable.
And they understand they must act quickly to take advantage of
their unique opportunity to define their country's future. They
know--from the youngest member of parliament to the Prime
Minister--that Armenia must reform the justice sector, build a
modern, efficient bureaucracy, reform the constitution and
electoral code, and improve the country's infrastructure and
delivery of basic services like trash pickup and street
cleaning. All we need to do is follow their lead.
That effort began when my amendment to allocate an
additional $40 million in democracy aid to Armenia received a
resounding 268 bipartisan votes on the House floor. And it
continues with this hearing. Going forward, we must continue
highlighting Armenia's progress, assisting its government, and
partnering with its parliamentarians.
We must also ensure that Armenia's leaders understand that
taking advantage of their special, limited opportunity to
define their country's future will require laying out specific
plans. The issue of corruption stands out especially--ad hoc
arrests of corrupt figures will not have the same legitimacy or
efficacy as a sustained, organized campaign within an
understandable framework. That level of clarity, of course,
would also aid reform efforts on issues from basic services to
the constitution.
Armenia has come so far in such a short period. It's
remarkable, inspiring, and a reminder that--even in the shadow
of growing global autocracy, even in a neighborhood filled with
bad actors, and even when it seems most distant--the flame of
democracy burns bright and we can help it grow.
Thank you again for holding this hearing and thank you to
our witnesses for sharing your knowledge. I look forward to
learning more about how we can help Armenia's democracy grow
and prosper.
Prepared Statement of Hon. Frank Pallone
Thank you to the U.S. Helsinki Commission, Chairman Veasey,
and Co-Chair Wicker for holding this important hearing.
I would like to start by acknowledging the incredible
progress Armenia has made since I first visited in the 1990s.
This is especially true of the last year, where we saw a
grassroots movement take hold during the ``Velvet Revolution''
starting in April 2018. Last December, that revolution
culminated with the freest, fairest and most open national
elections in the country's history. These elections brought in
one of the youngest and most reform-minded legislatures and
executives that Armenia has ever had.
I had the pleasure of meeting several of these individuals
during my recent visit to Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh earlier
this month. I was struck by the sense of opportunity and
promise imparted by Prime Minister Pashinyan and his My Step
alliance--and by the incredibly hopeful mood that can be found
throughout the country.
There is progress being made and a real sense of momentum
within this young government. However, one should not ignore
the major changes that are still needed to fulfill the goals of
the revolution. This includes bolstering civil society,
strengthening its democratic and judicial institutions, and
rooting out corruption in an even-handed way. These challenges
will require immense focus on the part of the government, and
it will require significant international investment and aid to
ensure reform efforts take a firm hold. That is why I am
working with the other co-chairs of the Congressional Caucus on
Armenian Issues to encourage State Department and USAID funding
for projects in Armenia.
I have also introduced a resolution that aims to officially
recognize the democratic reforms that are currently taking
place. It reaffirms the critical importance of US-Armenia
cooperation as well. My hope is that Congress will immediately
take up and pass these measures to show full American support
for Armenian democratic reforms. I believe that taking these
steps and providing investments will build on the US-Armenia
strategic relationship and help to grow the already thriving
pro-democracy movement.
We must continue to do more, committing significant
resources to Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh, and I am hopeful
that these efforts will yield success.
Thank you again for holding this aptly timed hearing.
Prepared Statement of Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin
Good afternoon. We are here today to discuss an exciting
and important development in the former Soviet Union and the
OSCE region as a whole: a political revolution that has opened
the door to long-overdue reforms in the Republic of Armenia.
Last year, tens of thousands of Armenians went to the
streets to put a stop to the creeping autocracy that was
tightening its grip on the country. In Armenia, the same ruling
party had prevailed in elections for more than two decades,
bolstered by a vast network of political and economic
corruption. As of April 2018, Armenia's president had ruled for
ten years and was poised to evade his presidential term limit
by assuming greater powers as prime minister under
constitutional amendments he had championed.
I stand in admiration of the Armenian people who declared
in April of last year that `enough is enough.' The change these
citizens brought about through nonviolence was almost
impossible to imagine before they began their collective
action. Over the course of just a few days in April 2018,
peaceful protests and civil disobedience replaced the ruling
party with an opposition-led government. By the end of the
year, this newly-installed government held free and fair
elections and was rewarded with a super-majority in the
parliament and a resounding mandate to carry out its promises
of sweeping political and economic reform.
The central demands of the revolution were to fight
corruption, uphold democracy, and build economic opportunity.
Each of these goals is noble but none of them are easy. I look
forward to learning from our witnesses today where these reform
plans currently stand and how the United States can assist in
realizing the democratic aspirations of the Armenian people.
In addition to tackling corruption, strengthening the rule
of law, building confidence in democratic institutions,
advancing transitional justice, and growing the economy, I
would urge the new Armenian government, in partnership with the
United States, to regard the adoption of renewable energy
technologies as a matter of strategic importance. As of today,
Armenia's reliance on Russian and Iranian sources of energy
leave it vulnerable to malign external influence that is
hostile to democratic development in the country.
Last year, as Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, I commissioned a minority staff report
detailing the Kremlin's decades' long assault on democracy in
Russia and Europe. The report describes how Russia responded to
``color revolutions'' in the former Soviet Union in the early
2000s by channeling efforts and resources toward organizations
dedicated to promoting the Kremlin's agenda or agitating
against democratic gains. On this point, the report's findings
are sobering: ``[m]ost of the Russian government's funding is
focused on post-Soviet `swing states' like Ukraine, Moldova,
Georgia, and Armenia.'' The Kremlin is dedicated to obstructing
democratic movements at every turn or scuttling them
altogether. I hope our witnesses today will address the role of
Russian influence and disinformation in Armenia and provide
recommendations for how to address it.
Given the Turkish Government's ongoing military operation
in northeastern Syria that threatens the peaceful coexistence
of ethnic and religious minorities in that region, I want to
reaffirm my longstanding support for official U.S. recognition
of the Armenian Genocide perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire in
1915. I worry that our refusal as a nation to explicitly
recognize this historical fact impedes our ability to learn
history's lessons--lessons that are of relevance to the events
we are witnessing today. I reiterate my call for the Trump
Administration to urgently reverse its policy of disengagement
from northeastern Syria, which puts counterterrorism
objectives, regional stability, and civilian populations at
risk.
In closing, I want to thank Chairman Alcee Hastings for
keeping the Helsinki Commission focused on these developments
in Armenia that bear important consequences for the future of
fundamental freedoms and human rights in the OSCE region. I
also want to extend my appreciation to my fellow commissioner
Congressman Marc Veasey for chairing today's hearing--it is a
pleasure to serve on the Helsinki Commission together where we
can collaborate to uphold our shared values at home and abroad.
Prepared Statement of Hamazasp Danielyan
Thank you, Mr. Veasey, and thank you to the Helsinki
Commission members. Let me start with thanking the honorable
members of this distinguished Commission for organizing these
hearings and bringing Armenia's democratic transformation under
the spotlight. Your interest towards democratic developments in
Armenia is very encouraging and the support is very much
appreciated. I should say that, as a member of the
Parliamentary Assembly of the Organisation for Security and
Cooperation of Europe, we have established a good working
relationship with the US delegation and its distinguished
members. Though, I believe that there are still opportunities
to further deepen our cooperation across all three dimensions
of the OSCE.
I believe today's hearing will contribute to that aim,
especially in the direction of human rights and democracy. I
also believe that Armenia's recent experience with its peaceful
democratic transformation has much to offer for many countries
in the region and across the globe. This experience and
commitment to democratic values and human rights was recognized
only a few days ago when Armenia was elected by over 140 UN
member states to become a member of the Human Rights Council of
the United Nations.
Now, coming to the process of democratic transformation in
Armenia, there are many aspects I would like to present.
Instead of immediately diving into the texts of the reforms
that are underway in Armenia, I thought it was important to
provide some highlights of my personal experience over the last
decade. It is a journey that is directly intertwined with the
changes that are happening now in Armenia.
Let me begin with the February 2008 presidential election
that took place in Armenia. I was working in Yerevan for an
important organization headquartered in the United States
called IFES, the International Foundation for Electoral
Systems. Our office supported the democratic elections in
Armenia and was an observer to the systemic level of election
violations that occurred. I cannot forget the efforts of a
brave American woman by the name of Linda Edgeworth, who
intervened on behalf of one of the local observers that was
being harassed in a local precinct. There are about 2000
precincts in Armenia and, unfortunately, they were not enough
Lindas to prevent this systemic level of vote rigging. After
this election, for ten days, citizens of Armenia protested
peacefully on the streets. These protests culminated in one of
the darkest days of modern Armenian history, March 1st, 2008,
when fatal force was used by police and ten people were killed
on the streets. Only a few months later in the summer of 2008,
I remember conversations I had with my friend and fellow
panelist Arsen Kharatyan here in DC about the democratic
prospects for Armenia. Those were not very hopeful
conversations. The prospects were not very bright. Despite
that, I returned to Armenia with the hope of contributing to
the continued democratic development of the country. One of the
best and most secure ways to do so was joining USAID efforts. I
spent most of my career working with different USAID projects
aimed at the democracy and governance sector in Armenia to
strengthen democratic institutions.
Over the next years, I was hired as a country expert to
review USAID's five-year strategy and after a number of failed
attempts to make changes, it seemed Armenia was moving in the
wrong direction. An important negative milestone in Armenia's
autocratization was the adoption of constitutional changes in
December 2015, which paved the way for that president, first
elected in amidst the gunshots of 2008, to extend his rule
beyond the two term limit by changing Armenia to parliamentary
model, where he could stay on as Prime Minister. I clearly
remember drafting the annual report for Freedom House in 2016,
distressed at another year of stagnation for Armenia and that
my country was approaching indicators that would likely soon
see it downgraded to the classification of ``Not Free'',
despite all the efforts of civil society, international
partners and the handful of marginalized change makers within
the government. I must admit that there were moments that when
I started to doubt if I would ever witness genuine democratic
changes or even a single free and fair election in Armenia
during my lifetime.
As we all expected, President Sargsyan was nominated to
continue as Prime Minister in 2018. I had those same doubts in
mind, even as I joined the protesters on April 14 in Freedom
Square, the gathering place that had been the epicenter of all
important developments in modern Armenian history, including
its struggle for independence from the Soviet Union. At first,
there were only a couple thousand of us protesters. I remember
fellow panelist Daniel Ioannisian there with his drone,
documenting the event. In a small chat with Arsen, we spoke
about the necessity of raising our voices against this final
step in Serzh Sargsyan's well-planned strategy to stay in
power, even if it did not affect the final result. We did not
want to see Armenia become another post-soviet country that is
indefinitely ruled by a single person and a single party. It
was to our great relief that that message resonated widely with
the Armenian people. Only a few weeks later, we witnessed the
protests grow so large it brought the country to a standstill,
and successfully forced Sargsyan's resignation and the
installation of protest leader Nikol Pashinyan as the new Prime
Minister.
Soon after, in July 2018, Prime Minister Pashinyan created
a commission of experts, led by Daniel, that was tasked with
recommending a package of changes to the Electoral Code ahead
of snap parliamentary elections. I was a member of that
Commission, returning to Yerevan from my work with the
Smithsonian Institute here in DC for last year's Folk Life
Festival, featuring Armenia. After a couple of months of work,
this commission presented its final package. It was actually
exactly one year ago today, on October 22nd, 2018, that the
parliament rejected the bill that would have enacted those
recommendations. The outgoing party of the previous regime
still held a majority in Parliament. Thus, in December 2018, an
early parliamentary election was held anyway, under the
previous Electoral Code. I can say that they were the first-
ever genuinely democratic elections since Armenia's
independence as was also reflected in the assessment of the
OSCE ODIHR observation mission. I am honored to be a member of
this new Parliament. Interestingly, had the previous
government's members voted in favor of our more inclusive
electoral rules, they would still have retained a few seats.
Instead, they were completely shut out by their own system.
Our attempt at electoral reform is thus still underway. In
March 2018, a tri-partisan working group was formed to design
and draft electoral changes with input from all three parties
represented in parliament. This working group has prioritized a
number of areas for the reform, including changes to the Law on
Political Parties. Just last Friday, we held a day-long public
hearing with participation from all major stakeholders to
discuss how we can both cut red tape for party organization in
Armenia but also increase transparency because we consider this
to be an important anti-corruption measure.
I will conclude by stating that we have no illusions that
the task of creating strong and democratic institutions is
simple. There will be a lot of challenges ahead but the effort
will be well worth it if our generation can achieve the
critical task institutionalizing Armenia's democratic
statehood. In fact, it is the only way to enable Armenia to
meet its domestic and foreign challenges.
I want to say that this is a big struggle for a
comparatively small nation. Its focus is not geopolitics but
the individual people who wish to restore their sovereignty and
are doing their best to make their homeland a place where they
can pursue happiness with respect for human rights and
freedoms. This is the struggle that we all hoped to emerge from
for the past decade.
I look forward to diving into the specific directions of
the reforms during our conversation today.
Thank you.
Prepared Statement of Arsen Kharatyan
Thank you Chairman Veasey, Chairman Hastings and Co-
Chairman Wicker for holding this important hearing, and for
inviting me to testify about Armenia's Velvet, non-violent
Revolution and the progress the new government has made since
coming to power in May of last year.
Briefly about myself. I grew up in Armenia and got engaged
in civic activism at a young age. In 2008, after the disputed
Presidential elections that saw then-President Serzh Sargsyan
claim to power, many of us were arrested and harassed to an
extent that we were forced to leave the country. It wasn't all
bad during those years--I got married to my wife, Sonia
Shahrigian, who was born across the river in Virginia. Both of
our kids were born in Sibley Hospital here in the District.
Throughout the 2010s, I worked for Voice of America's Armenian
service before my wife, who works for the Millennium Challenge
Corporation, was assigned to the Republic of Georgia as deputy
mission chief for the past five years. While in Georgia, I
founded a media organization that focuses on the Armenian
community living in Georgia and Armenian-Georgian relations.
Now onto the topic of today's hearing. I think it will be
apt for the Members of this Commission to re-live the marvelous
events of last year for a few minutes.
Last spring, when a small group of our friends alongside
Nikol Pashinyan started walking from Armenia's northern city of
Gyumri towards Yerevan, the capital, almost no one believed
that in a span of weeks, Armenians would shake off decades of
lethargy and hopelessness and begin finding themselves and
believing in themselves. Our march was a protest against plans
by one man to rule Armenia indefinitely. And prior to the start
of our march, we said that in addition to not allowing the
indefinite rule of a failed regime, we intended to defeat and
uproot suffocating levels of pessimism, disengagement and
hopelessness that had overwhelmed the people of Armenia.
We knew and said as much that without liberating ourselves
from the corrosive and arresting notions of apathy, we cannot
overcome and resolve Armenia's pressing public policy
challenges. We walked through Armenia's cities and villages
where we were again reminded of the failures of her successive
governments. But we also sensed and were inspired by the
resolve and perseverance of our citizens. We encouraged others
to ``Take a Step'' and join our movement. On the 14th day of
the march while entering Yerevan another group of civic-minded
citizens who were doing their part to protest the former Prime
Minister-cum-President from solidifying his one-man and one-
party rule.
Together, we walked into universities' quads and lecture
halls and with malfunctioning bullhorns and coarse voices
called upon students to shed their apathy, pessimism and
resignation and commit to democracy, justice, freedom and
fairness and engage in this civic movement that puts at its
core citizens' dignity and rights. Students heeded our calls in
droves, as did thousands of others.
We continued marching through the streets of Armenia and in
days ahead, sensing the unprecedented pent-up demand for
wholesale change in Armenia, and seeing the surging of
believers and doers adding to our numbers, we declared the
start of a Velvet Revolution.
Inspired by the words and guided by the deeds of Rev.
Martin Luther King Jr., Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi, Lech
Walesa, Vaclav Havel and Armenia's own men and women who stood
against the Soviet Empire in the late 1980s and defended
Armenia's sovereignty, and building upon the legacy of previous
pro-democracy movements of Armenia, we set in motion a peaceful
revolution.
We engaged in acts of civil disobedience, saw the closure
of streets, shutting down of public transportation and bridges,
blocking entrances to government buildings, boycotts of
businesses tied to the regime, sit-ins and more. Our numbers
grew and grew, and we walked more. By April 23, Armenia's
longtime ruler resigned, which only increased the numbers of
Armenians who believed in themselves. We made it clear that the
people's demands must be met unconditionally and that Armenia
must have new leadership, one that has the backing of the
people and not the few dozen Members of Parliament of a morally
bankrupt political party in power for almost two decades.
After a few more political shenanigans by the party in
control of parliament, which were promptly answered by more
demonstrations of people power of an entire nation and its
diaspora, the once all-powerful ruling elite relented.
This was a remarkable display of people power that was
resolute, peaceful, tolerant, courageous and persistent which
in turn inspired the world. An incredible level of optimism and
confidence took over the hearts and minds of our people--and
until today, that self-confidence and optimism inspires and
motivates people remain engaged.
For the last three decades our nation experienced great
challenges. From military conflict in Nagorno Karabakh, to
massive economic decline, a transition from the Soviet
centralized to market economy with a continued blockade of our
borders two of our four neighbours. However, since our
independence in 1991 our people never stopped their struggle
for their fundamental freedoms, civil and electoral rights. We
do realize that the path to freedom is not an easy one, it is a
bumpy road but in our view Armenia and the Armenian people have
no other choice but to have a country with fully functioning
democratic institutions and a strong civil society.
While Armenia's non-violent Velvet Revolution is yet
another example of great positive transformation and a hope for
democracy for the world at this time of crisis, I have to admit
that there are great challenges we have to deal with. The new
democratically elected administration of our country, headed by
the leader of our revolution and currently the Prime Minister
of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan, has introduced its reform agenda
with big emphases to fight against corruption, building state
institutions, ensuring fundamental freedoms and liberties of
our citizens. While, the current ruling party received a very
high (70%) vote of confidence from Armenia's citizens during
the snap parliamentary elections in December 2018, the new
administration in Yerevan is now dealing with fundamental
changes in the state governance in order to insure the
prosperity for its citizens and security for the state. Years
of corrupt governance eroded the state apparatus, created an
oligarchic and kleptocratic system, where all of the resources
of the country were utilized to benefit a tiny minority of
strongmen and criminals.
Since the early 90s the American people supported Armenia
in its path to democracy, market economy, as well as helped
build the country's civil society and free media. I would like
to note that this continued support has been instrumental in
our success before and during our Velvet Revolution, as without
free media and a vibrant civil society this transformation
would not have been possible. Hence, it is time to move forward
and continue strengthening our democratic institutions and the
country of Armenian as a whole.
Since its inception, the democratically elected parliament
and the government of Armenia has announced about a wide range
of reforms in the country. One of the key areas for this reform
is the fight against corruption. I can state, that at this
point systemic corruption in the country is practically
eliminated, as the political elite which came to power as a
result of the revolution through free and fair elections, is a
group of young and educated idealists, who are true believers
of fundamental human rights and have the best intentions to
make their country a fully functioning democracy. However, it
is evident, that good intentions are not enough for changes of
this scale, so we do need your assistance at this critical
time.
The government of Armenia has announced about its policy of
fighting against corruption, which will soon be adopted by the
country's parliament. The policy includes a wide range of
changes in the areas of judiciary, tax and customs, reforming
police and public security system, as well as education, health
care and social security. The United States can and has already
showed interest in supporting the Armenian governments in all
of these areas, however it would be a great sign of support
from Washington if this interest translated into concrete
actions. While with the great help of the friends of Armenians
at the US Congress the financial aid to our country has grown
for the next year, earmarking the funds allocated to our
country like it is done with our neighbours Georgia and Ukraine
would be a great sign of wider political support. Meanwhile, in
my view ``from aid to trade'' should be the philosophy of
Washington DC with regards to Armenia. Hence, making OPIC funds
bigger would encourage American businesses to enter Armenian
market with more interest and confidence. Last but not least,
supporting Armenia in the area of security can and should be
discussed further. Our military is present in Iraq and
Afghanistan within the framework of NATOs Partnership for Peace
program. Considering the unresolved conflict in Nagorno
Karabakh and the changing security architecture of our region,
continued and deeper training of our security forces is of
crucial importance. It would be a terrible missed opportunity
if this self-empowerment and renaissance is not supported by
concrete actions by the United States. The American people have
been generous towards Armenians for over a century. They had
our backs during the Armenian Genocide, they welcomed the
refugees here and gave them a new home, they opened their
hearts and wallets when Armenia became independent again in
1991, and they should now embrace Armenia as she renews
herself.
That said, you should also raise your expectations of what
Armenia and the Armenian government can and should do in the
months and years ahead. You should not explain or excuse away
our failures because of geopolitics or the legacies of the
past. Yes, Armenia's challenges are decades in the making, but
just like the people's apathy and seemingly all-powerful
political monolith, the challenges can be overcome and
resolved. Much is at stake, and we have got to get this right.
The people who believed in themselves and the strength of the
universal ideals of freedom, fairness and pursuit of happiness,
deserve nothing less.
I once again thank this Commission for organizing this
important hearing and will be happy to address your questions.
Thank you for your attention.
Prepared Statement of Daniel Ioannisian
For decades democratic institutions were being
systematically destroyed in Armenia. All the state bodies
forcefully served a group of people who kept power in their
hands through rigged elections, extensive propaganda and total
apathy. This situation was an example of a state capture.
Expressing their discontent towards yet another attempt to
violate democracy and desiring to counteract corruption, the
people of Armenia made a democratic and peaceful revolution
last year.
As a result of the revolution, people who lost power did
not lose the enormous financial and media resources they had.
With the obvious support from Russia, they started active
propaganda against liberal democracy, setting liberal democracy
against security.
That propaganda is so active that it makes the authorities
step back from the ideology of liberal democracy and thus prove
that they do respect the importance of security. And here I
don't mean real security, I mean nationalistic and hoorah-
patriotic rhetorics.
Currently, Armenia needs to consolidate its democracy so
that the values of liberal democracy are not compromised. For
that reason, support to the development of democratic
institutes is important but not sufficient.
As I already noted, the representatives of the former
corrupt system hinder democratic transformation in all possible
ways. These groups continue to own huge financial resources
obtained by corruption, and they act very efficiently in the
cyber and information space together with Russia.
I should note that in this respect it will be very
efficient to freeze the illegally obtained assets of those who
have committed corruption related crimes in Armenia. To freeze
it everywhere in the world, including in the US. Of course,
this all should be done with due respect towards human rights
and fundamental freedoms.
But neutralisation of corrupt representatives of the former
government is not enough. It is also important to support
making democratic transition in Armenia to make it more
complete and comprehensive.
It is crucial that the independent judicial system and
efficient law enforcement develop in Armenia. One of the
weaknesses of the law enforcement system in this respect are
the lack of capacities to fight against corruption, cyber
crimes and organized crime.
The capacities of the law enforcement and judicial systems
in this sector are so weak that very often they are not able to
institute criminal prosecution based on the investigations
already conducted by investigative journalists or other
watchdogs.
As a result, the representatives of the former corrupt
government violate laws, commit financial and cyber crimes,
conduct large-scale campaigns against democratic reforms but
remain largely unpunished only because the capacities of the
law enforcement system and the Prosecutor's Office, and the
independence of the courts are not enough to respond to these
criminal activities.
Although Armenian authorities largely share democratic
values, they are quite inexperienced. And due to this factor
the former corrupt regime manages to force the authorities to
slow down the institutional reforms by setting security against
liberal democracy and affecting public opinion.
It is also important to note that with respect to higher
efficiency of reforms and not compromising the ideas of liberal
democracy, it is crucial that the process of reforms should be
inclusive and non-profit organizations which have promoted
democratic values for years are actively involved in it.
Today Armenia has the exclusive and unique opportunity to
put the principles of liberal democracy on institutional bases.
To reach that end, support should be provided to Armenia in
terms of becoming independent from Russia to the extent
possible. It is no secret to anybody here that Russia does not
like any democratization process in its neighbourhood.
And independence from Russia can grow if non-natural gas
based generation of electricity and other infrastructures will
develop in Armenia. The first will assist in reducing the
influence of Russian gas, and the second will help in bringing
back Armenian working-migrants from Russia since they also
serve as a pressure-exerting lever for Kremlin.
Prepared Statement of Miriam Lanskoy
I am grateful to the Helsinki Commission for holding this
very important hearing and for giving me the opportunity to
speak about the state of reform efforts in Armenia.
The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) is a private,
nonprofit foundation dedicated to the growth and strengthening
of democratic institutions around the world. NED has been
supporting civil society in Armenia continuously since the mid-
1990s, and maintains a large portfolio of projects. NED's
programs in Armenia include support for foreign policy think
tanks, human rights organizations, vote monitoring coalitions,
provision of legal expertise, conflict resolution, and media
assistance. Supporting the democratic transition in Armenia is
a major priority for NED and we have substantially expanded
funding for Armenian organizations.
Armenia's Velvet Revolution is an authentic democratic
breakthrough, a historic opportunity to build a more just
system. No event since Armenia acquired its independence in
1991 is of similar significance. Beyond transforming the
relationship between citizen and government in Armenia, it
stands as an example of peaceful transition for the post-Soviet
space. That Armenia has not altered its geopolitical alignments
and remains dependent on Russia for security and energy does
not diminish the significance of the opening or the opportunity
it presents for deepening relations with the US.
Reform plans have been slow to materialize, raising
concerns that the momentum for change could dissipate. Nikol
Pashinyan has been Prime Minister since May 2018 and the new
democratically elected parliament convened in January 2019.
What are the obstacles to reform? This is not entirely clear
and is subject to considerable debate. The philosophy of the
new leadership is to avoid dramatic change and they point
correctly to mistakes and abuses during transitions elsewhere.
Instead, they believe that they can make the existing system
work better through better practices. No serious analyst
questions their motives or their values--this debate is largely
about the strategy and speed of reform. Other factors at play
may be the lack of qualified and motivated professionals within
the ministries as well as over-centralization of power in the
office of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister has vast
responsibility for foreign and domestic policy and is a
charismatic leader--a journalist, a former political prisoner,
and parliamentarian--but lacking executive experience.
The fundamental approach is to start with reforms that
would support rule of law and eventually make Armenia more
attractive to investment. A program for anti-corruption reform,
which would include an anti-corruption court, freedom of
information mechanisms, and asset declarations for office
holders, is being drafted, as is a program for judicial reform.
The existing proposals represent a positive step, particularly
by the new Minister of Justice, to move forward with reforms
under challenging and imperfect circumstances, but they fail to
answer several key, big picture questions about what justice
will look like in a new Armenia, and at the micro-level need
increased detail and a plan for implementation. Despite these
flaws, putting these reforms forward, as with similar proposals
for reforms in the tax code, in education, and in healthcare,
generates momentum for important conversations which need to
happen if the revolution is to deliver on its promises.
While some progress has been made within the ministries
towards putting forward a reform agenda, parliament has, so
far, taken less of a leading role. The parliamentary elections
in December 2018 were free and fair and produced a parliament
with three parties where Pashinyan's My Step won with 70% of
the vote and has 88 out of 132 seats. The median age of a
parliamentarian is 40, and 101 members are freshmen. The
parliamentarians are young and new to politics. Moreover, the
parliament as an institution has never had a meaningful role,
power has always been concentrated in the executive. However,
over time the very talented young people in parliament may
start to take greater initiative. A strong parliament is a key
pillar of democracy and various forms of assistance, notably
from NDI and IRI, are already underway. Additional new
initiatives could include building up professional committee
staff and creating a parliamentary research service.
NED has prioritized its media assistance and countering
disinformation. Armenia has a real problem with disinformation
coming from Russian state media as well as domestic
disinformation. The main television stations are controlled by
oligarchs close to the old regime and are continuously
divisive, scandalous, and distracting. New broadcast licenses
will not be available for at least a year although there are
some reforms at the state broadcaster. NED is focusing on
building capacity of independent online outlets who have a
strong audience and a strong editorial line and can in the
future transition to producing television programs when that
opportunity becomes available. Other programs uncover
disinformation, support Russian language coverage of events in
Armenia, provide journalism trainings, and conduct analysis of
audiences and viewership trends. More could be done to provide
training, to support the emergence of independent media,
particularly television, and to help different government
entities develop communication strategies.
Perhaps the most significant process underway is the trial
of former President Robert Kocharian. This is the first time
that any former president of a post-Soviet state has been
brought to trial. Kocharian is a friend of Putin and few would
have expected that Armenia would risk antagonizing Putin by
prosecuting him. Kocharian is charged with abusing his
authority by imposing martial law and authorizing use of deadly
force to disperse protests leading to the deaths of ten people
in 2008. This pivotal case is being handled by an unreformed
police, prosecutors, and judiciary. The Constitutional Court
made up almost entirely of Kocharian's appointees has ruled
that he enjoys immunity, yet the case is proceeding to trial
over their objections. Kocharian's defense argues that he had
legal authority to call martial law. It is not at clear that
the constitution, the law, the judiciary--all produced by an
authoritarian system designed to shield the president from
accountability--can deliver justice in this case. This is the
central dilemma of today's Armenia--can the good people now in
government achieve their admirable goals without first
undertaking systematic institutional restructuring?
Pashinyan and My Step remain very popular and are only one
year into a five-year term. Armenians understand that this
government is trying to solve problems that it did not create,
that have accumulated over two decades of authoritarianism and
kleptocracy. However, the oligarchic disinformation machine is
waiting patiently for the new government will fail to deliver
so that at some future point they might exploit this
government's mistakes or unfulfilled promises to engineer a
comeback. The lessons from attempted democratic transitions
elsewhere in Eurasia are clear, backsliding has occurred
frequently, and to ward off that possibility tangible
improvements must materialize rapidly lest public trust erodes
and authoritarians return to power.
Prepared Statement of Jonathan D. Katz
Chairman Hastings, Co-Chairman Wicker and Members of the
Commission,
Thank you for the opportunity to join this distinguished
panel to discuss Armenia's democratic transformation and steps
the United States and other international partners can take to
work with the government in Yerevan, along with Armenian
citizens and the Armenian diaspora, to strengthen rule of law
and transparency in Armenia.
As you may be aware, the German Marshall Fund of the United
States and our Black Sea Trust based in Bucharest continue to
support democracy, civil society and free media in Armenia and
across Eastern Europe. GMF working with international partners
has stepped up our efforts following the Velvet Revolution to
support Armenians working towards genuine democratic reform,
human rights and rule of law.
In an era where we have seen democratic backsliding
occurring in too many countries across Eastern Europe, Armenia
stands out as a nation bucking this disturbing trend, despite
enormous economic, political, security and geostrategic
challenges. Those challenges are particularly acute when you
consider closed borders, Armenia's delicate balancing act
between Russia and the West, and what had up until recently
been weak democratic progress since independence in 1991. I
know the Commission has followed Armenia's progress closely
from the referendum in 1991 that led to independence from the
Soviet Union to the dramatic events that led to the Velvet
Revolution in 2018.
Armenia has undergone a truly historic transformation
following its Velvet Revolution in the Spring of 2018, led by
civic activists and now Prime Minister Pashinyan, that has
ushered in an unparalleled environment for democratic and
judicial reforms that had been stymied by previous governments.
Parliamentary elections last December where the My Step
Alliance, which includes Prime Minister Pashinyan's Civil
Contract Party, won over 70% of the votes have created
unprecedented conditions for the Armenian government to act on
the Velvet Revolution demands.
Notwithstanding this remarkable transformation, Armenia's
reforms are incomplete, and the country faces some serious
challenges. The United States has an important role to play in
helping Armenia face these challenges and carry out
transformative democratic reforms. Helping Armenia succeed is
also important to overall U.S. and European efforts to advance
democracy and combat kleptocracy across Europe and Eurasia.
Armenia's revolution, which no one could have predicted--is
an opportunity for Armenians to break free of entrenched
corruption that has held back this nation politically and
economically. This is one reason why it is incredibly important
for partners of Armenia, including the United States, the U.S.
Helsinki Commission and Congress, to support Armenia's
transformation, including by providing necessary assistance and
resources, and working with the Armenian people and government.
U.S. policy toward Armenia should also include a strategy that
greatly enhances Armenia's independence and expands its
political, economic, security, and energy options.
Chairman Hastings and Commissioners, your leadership in
this effort is critical and two-fold. First, your leadership is
needed to ensure that legislation and assistance for Armenia
currently making its way through Congress is passed and
assistance is funded appropriately. If we support a deeper
bilateral relationship with Armenia it should come with more
robust diplomatic engagement and overall assistance. Second, it
is essential that you continue to press the Armenian
government, in Washington and through OSCE efforts in Armenia,
to carry out expeditiously judicial, rule of law and anti-
corruption reforms that it has prioritized and to take
additional steps to improve human rights, gender equality and
security reforms. Armenia's democracy reforms are a work in
progress today and the Helsinki Commission's sustained
attention, encouragement and engagement is exactly the support
needed to spur progress.
I want to take a step back to look at Armenia's reform
progress and challenges. This past February, the new government
led by Prime Minister Pashinyan announced an ambitious five-
year plan of the government focused on economy, trade,
security, and other top priorities including democracy, rule of
law and transparency.
The government's plan, which is to be commended, focuses on
the ``key importance of democracy, development of democratic
institutions, rule of law, and equality before the law for all,
the existence of an independent judiciary, and introduction of
an effective mechanism of checks and balances. The plan also
focused on accountability and transparency of the government,
public rejection of corruption, and corruption-free society.''
I will touch briefly on judicial and electoral reform that
are critical to continued democratic and economic progress in
Armenia.
Judicial Reform
Armenia's judiciary still lacks independence, despite
several high-profile arrests of former officials demonstrating
the government's commitment to the issue. This factors into the
ability of the government to effectively carryout democratic
reforms, combat corruption, and create an economy that is
attractive and transparent to domestic and international
investors. Prime Minister Pashinyan has said the lack of
judicial independence was the ``number one threat to the
country.''
The leadership of the Armenian judiciary includes holdovers
from previous governments that were not committed to an
independent judiciary upholding the rule of law. This is a
pattern in countries that seek rule of law reforms but are
blocked by judiciaries. For example, this is a problem in
Moldova and Ukraine where the judiciaries represent the
priorities and thinking of previous governments and entrenched
economic and political interests.
While judicial and rule of law reform is moving forward,
the pace of reforms is still not as advanced as many thought it
would be under the Pashinyan government. That is not to say
that action is not taking place. For example, the draft anti-
corruption plan laid out by the government includes ``three
main directions including prevention of corruption, the
exposing of corruption crimes, and anticorruption education and
awareness.''
This month we are seeing progress, including the
government's recent announcement by Armenian Justice Minister
Badasyan, on the provision of greater detail on rule of law,
judicial, and constitutional reforms. Minister Badasyan has
spoken specially about to e-justice tools to expand access to
justice throughout the country and reforms in Armenia's
prosecution system and investigative bodies.
The Venice Commission responded positively last week to the
Armenian governments judicial reform package. The Commission
said that the proposals are ``in line with European standards
and contribute to combatting corruption without encroaching on
the independence of the judiciary.'' The Commission stressed,
however, that the offer of early retirement to some justices of
the Constitutional Court made in a draft law is not
objectionable only if it remains strictly voluntary and if it
does not hinder the effective functioning of the Constitutional
Court.
Elections and Electoral Reform
Prior to the local and national elections in 2018,
Armenians elections were not seen as free, fair, or
transparent. There were deep concerns about the misuse of
administrative resources, the independence and professionalism
of the Central Election Commission, undue influence on
opposition parties, and lack of independent media.
The 2018 elections, including local and national elections,
were an improvement on the status quo. The Organization for
Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) found that ``the
general absence of electoral malfeasance, including of vote-
buying and pressure on voters, allowed for genuine
competition.'' The Pashinyan government has adopted legislation
that would criminalize vote buying.
Internal and External Challenges
Although there has been progress there are several internal
and external challenges that impact the progress of Yerevan's
democratic reforms. Despite the deep desire of the public,
Prime Minister Pashinyan, and his government, transforming a
country like Armenia that was scored as a semi-consolidated
authoritarian regime by Freedom House's Nation in Transit in
2018, is a monumental task under the best of circumstances.
The government infrastructure, administration, and
judiciary left in place for the new government, along with
security and economic challenges, makes true reform an uphill
battle for the Armenian government. The Prime Minister tried to
compel changes to a Judiciary in the spring with limited
effect. Many Armenians are concerned the Judiciary is not
independent or up to the task of democratic and rule of law
transformation in Armenia, but affecting change is difficult.
The entrenched political elite that controlled Armenia's
legislative and executive branches may be gone but resistance
to changing a corrupt system remains. Partners of Armenia
should understand that reform, and its implementation, will
take time.
Beyond domestic challenges, Russia is a key external factor
in Yerevan's reform efforts. Moscow continues to play a
significant role in Armenia and pulls strings in key sectors.
What complicates this relationship is that Pashinyan and Putin
are on opposites sides of the spectrum on democracy and
combating corruption and rule of law.
Despite substantive differences on democracy between the
two leaders Moscow refrained from interfering in the 2018
antigovernment demonstrations or the subsequent power transfer,
which is one reason that Pashinyan pledged to maintain close
ties with Russia. But Moscow can ratchet up pressure and
instability through different mediums if Putin believes his
interests are threatened. Armenia has a deep relationship with
Russia, which has many economic, energy, and security sources
of leverage.
PM Pashinyan has been careful to maintain good relations
with Russia and desire for greater engagement with the West. In
a recent Pashinyan post on Facebook following a meeting of the
Eurasian Economic Union, he hosted in Yerevan, he posted that:
``Armenia-Russia relations are on a reliable and positive
track.''
China is an emerging external actor that could impact
Armenia reform efforts present and future. Beijing has a
growing political, economic, and technological relationship
with Armenia. Positive relations with China have become a top
foreign policy priority for Yerevan. In turn, China has
expanded its diplomatic and soft power footprint in Yerevan,
including a face to face meeting between Pashinyan and Chinese
President Xi Jinping in May focused on Belt and Road and
development cooperation.
United States-Armenia Bilateral Relations
The United States continues to be an important partner for
Armenia. This connection has taken on added significance
recently after twenty-eight years of support, given the new
government's focus on democracy, rule of law, and countering
corruption. The bilateral relationship is deeper than it has
been in years. However, there is opportunity for greater U.S.-
Armenia cooperation.
The Pashinyan government's democratic reform efforts align
closely with the values of the United States, European Union
and other Western partners in supporting rule of law, human
rights, and a transparent market-oriented economy. U.S. and EU
officials have been quick to point out important reform
progress carried out by the Armenian government. The European
Union, through the EU-Armenia Comprehensive and Enhanced
Partnership Agreement (CEPA), matches Washington in assistance
support for democracy reforms, economic growth, and other
issues.
The increased focus and appreciation of new political
dynamics in Armenia have led to changes in the bilateral
relationship. The U.S. has signaled an increased willingness
through the U.S.-Armenia Strategic Dialogue (USASD) to discuss
``cooperation on strategic reforms and promoting shared
democratic values and deepening cooperation across all areas of
the bilateral relationship.''
Having served as a co-chair of the U.S.-Armenia Task Force
in 2016 I can see an expanded, current level of engagement
between the United States and Armenia. The U.S. government
clearly now has a whole of U.S. government approach and a
widening of areas of potential cooperation compared to previous
U.S.-Armenia bilateral dialogues. For example, two important
USAID projects, focused on economic growth and good governance,
totaling $16 million dollars, were signed during the USASD in
May 2019. This represents and supports increased cooperation of
the United States with Armenians. The good governance program
is funded with $6 million dedicated for its first year of
funding in 2019.
Beyond the USASD, however, the United States should
continue to strengthen diplomatic and assistance coordination
and make every effort to find opportunities for high-level
engagement. The level of requested funding from the
administration over the last several years, including $6.8
million in Fiscal Year 2018 and $6 million in Fiscal Year 2019
is not enough and sends the wrong message about the U.S.
commitment to Armenia and its reform.
The role of Congress as mentioned earlier in my testimony
remains essential to strengthening the bilateral relations
between the United States and Armenia. I agree with bipartisan
calls from the Hill to strengthen and upgrade the strategic
partnership with Yerevan and the Armenian people. This could
include increasing funding levels, encouraging high level
engagement between U.S.-Armenian leaders, advancing additional
avenues of support, for example through the Millennium
Challenge Corporation and the new U.S. Development Finance
Corporation, and ensuring the sustainability of resources over
multiple years.
Congress has repeatedly filled the gap ensuring that
assistance levels remains appropriate. According to the
Congressional Research Service, the U.S. Embassy in Armenia
stated that FY2018 assistance would amount to more than $26
million - despite the Administration's initial request of only
$6.8 million. Going forward, Congress has had to step in to
ensure that funding levels remain sufficient.
Congress should also work with the State Department and
USAID and other partners to expand U.S. support for civil
society and independent media in Armenia. It is critical that
both independent media and civil society remain robust to hold
accountable the Armenian government as it moves forward on
reforms, especially related to anti-corruption and rule of law
efforts. In turn, it is critical that the Armenian government
respond appropriately when civil society is attacked. The U.S.
can help to support these principles.
Conclusion
There is an historic opportunity for Armenia to transform
and become a deeper, more democratic partner for the United
States and the West. The United States and Europe have a strong
interest in supporting Armenia's democratic and rule of law
reforms. The Armenian government has made important strides,
but it needs time and support, both domestic and international,
to root out the vestiges of an old, corrupt system that
benefited a few at the expense of many.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify at the U.S.
Helsinki Commission. I look forward to answering your
questions.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
This is an official publication of the
Commission on Security and
Cooperation in Europe.
< < <
This publication is intended to document
developments and trends in participating
States of the Organization for Security
and Cooperation in Europe [OSCE].
< < <
All Commission publications may be freely
reproduced, in any form, with appropriate
credit. The Commission encourages
the widest possible dissemination
of its publications.
< < <
http://www.csce.gov @HelsinkiComm
The Commission's Web site provides
access to the latest press releases
and reports, as well as hearings and
briefings. Using the Commission's electronic
subscription service, readers are able
to receive press releases, articles,
and other materials by topic or countries
of particular interest.
Please subscribe today.