Why retain the Hrchagakir in the Constitution, when?

 I intended to title this blog as follows: Why retain the Hrchagakir in the Constitution when Armenia did not strive to live up, or could not live up to its declaration? Vaհe H Apelian

The issue of contention for amending the Armenian Constitution has crystallized, as it was expected all along. It pertained to including or not including the Hrchagakir/ Declaration of Independence (DOI), in the upcoming constitution amendment. 

The constitution the government will propose for amendment will not have the Hrchagakir/Declaration of Independence (DOI) (Link 1). At the present, the Hrchagakir/ Declaration of Independence, makes the first article of the constitution.

Yesterday, on October 29, 2016, the PM Nikol Pashinyan stated that, "it is impossible to have an independent state with that text; that text is about the impossibility of having a state.”  

The opposition opposes the removal of the Hrchagakir from the constitution. It alleges that the DOI is being removed from the constitution to placate Azerbaijan, as Aliev has conditioned the removal of the DOI for signing a peace treaty with Armenia, which Armenia has been pursuing. 

However, in the same conference with the reporters, the PM alleged that there is a strong possibility some delegates from the opposition will join the government to have the required quorum for amending the constitution by the National Assembly. But should there not be enough votes from the opposition to amend the Constitution, the government will call for a nation-wide referendum for amending the constitution. Should the people reject amending the Constitution, his government, the PM Nikol Pashinyan said, will resign for not having accomplished its mission. 

My question to the reader who happens to read this blog is the following. Why should Armenia keep the Declaration of Independence in its constitution? 

From get go I have found the DOI poorly written. Its preamble calls for unification with Nagorno Karabagh. It reads: “Based on the December 1, 1989, joint decision of the Armenian SSR Supreme Council and the Artsakh National Council on the "Reunification of the Armenian SSR and the Mountainous Region of Karabakh;" But the fact of the matter is that, since the adoption of the DOI on August 23. 1990 , no Armenian government recognized Nagorno Karabagh, let alone annexed it. In short, since adopting the Hrchakagir, the successive Armenian government failed to live up to its declaration. (Link 2)

Yes, the Hrchagakir as worded, concerns Azerbaijan. Should Mexico enshrine in its declaration of independence annexing New Mexico, the 47th state in the Union, I am sure, it will be the business of the United State of America to settle the matter with Mexico, one way or another.

Let us also bear in mind the following paradox. The first statement in the Hrchagakir declares that, “The Armenian SSR is renamed the Republic of Armenia (Armenia). The Republic of Armenia shall have its flag, coat of arms, and anthem.” Since we all accepted that the former Soviet Socialist Republic of Armenia is the present free, independent, democratic Republic of Armenia, claiming also unification with Nagorno Karabagh may very well be regarded as an hostile act. 

I do not entertain the alleged TurkAbaijan demands for amending the Hrchagakir / The Declaration of Independence. But I raise the following fundamental question. Does Armenia, as declared in the Hrchagakir have any territorial claim from its neighbors? If not, why does Armenia retain the reunification with Nagorno Karabagh on the preamble of the Declaration of Independence? 

The citizens of Armenia have historic decision to make before the mandate of the Nikol Pashinyan ends in June 2031. 

                                        ***

Link1: Declaration of Independence – Hrchagakir: https://gov.am/en/independence/

Link 2: Reflecting on the proposed change of the Constitution of Armenia. https://vhapelian.blogspot.com/2024/07/reflecting-on-proposed-change-of.html