Are Sasna Tzerer “terrorists”? In any case the Armenian authorities are well guarded to qualify in this way during the time that lasted the occupation of the police barracks by this group during the second half of July. Better, they have promised a fair trial would be prohibited where this humiliating notion. And when they surrendered, very theatrical, the police have treated these men as fighters, with dignity. So may we be amazed by the output of chairman of the Armenian parliament on 25 August. The latter, Mr. Galust Sahakian, has indeed allowed to violate the gentlemen’s agreement that had prevailed throughout this action by using the location of its players ignominious epithet “terrorist”.

While we can all afford: back on their word, in favor of a change in circumstances, a change of a power struggle. As can backtrack on the compromise with the parliamentary opposition on the anti-fraud devices that must be in place for the next elections. Just as one can swear, spit every three months we will take exceptional measures to fight against corruption and tax evasion, but never take action. One can certainly agree all right, promise everything and never take anything once one has all the levers of power, even if the conditions that allowed this monopoly are unreliable.

But in the end, that is the word of the State, if it continues to be flouted by those who have the same exorbitant privilege to enforce? What credibility when lying is erected by some rule of governance? And where is the sense of honor and when you hit the back of the men who no longer have the means to defend themselves, while also, power has also shown its capacity for restraint by refusing such to storm during the occupation of the barracks, or freeing some political activists wrongfully detained as Alec Yenikomchian.

Harsh words were spoken in our columns and the author of these lines on 17 July against this action “suicidal” and its actors, while it had resulted in the death of a policeman with extremely serious injuries to two others (one of whom died a few weeks later), and the kidnapping of four police officers. But we owe to the truth to say that in the days that followed, the members of the commando were able to give a different image of themselves as projected by violence, primal, of their action. By their past first unveiled over the day, which is that of patriots and activists dedicated to the cause of their people. By their behavior then: military ceremony with their prisoners armed for the occasion to pay tribute to the police officer killed in the heat of the moment; then the release of their hostages unconditionally; finally surrender accepted “not to run extra blood” in an atmosphere of soothing words and commitments the government on a magnanimous justice.

A very important part of the inhabitants of Yerevan is not it also wrong, providing massively (events 20 000) support to those it has elevated to hero, chanting their names on the streets brandishing their portraits. The people never defends “terrorists”. And whatever the opinion one may have about this action and its proclaimed objectives, it must be recognized that it implied for the perpetrators a sense of extraordinary commitment, to sacrifice, and that n ‘obeyed, essentially, that the ideals imbued with nobility (release of political prisoners, denouncing any surrender of territory to Azerbaijan, etc.). All this, commands respect, even though we can not accept violence as a procedure of political activity in Armenia. Respect does not mean approval.

And the state grow up in these circumstances, and in this dangerous stage facing the country, to set an example of responsibility rather than taking the easy trampling down those who dared challenge him. Because no excess, no triumphalism may be liable to calm things down. On the contrary. These are past injustices that have brought the Armenians, among the best, to put their lives in the balance to change things, even take the risk of adventurism. These are the disproportionate prison sentences, some arbitrary, too numerous democratic deficiencies, poor prospects of legal solutions that have shaped the unfortunate belief that only a coup would be likely to break the deadlock.

At a time when Armenia will celebrate 25 years of independence, it is time for its leaders to opt for other software, to reverse the trend, to break the vicious circle of violence, say no to the inevitability of conflict and reports of inter-Armenian forces. Although the radical opposition, with its excesses, also bears its share of responsibility in the situation, it is for them to restore confidence, to renew the son of the dialogue, and to enforce compliance not by coercion but by respecting precisely those they serve to lead. Any state needs order. But it is more based order, and stronger, than that derives its legitimacy from the people, that inspires the moral authority, exemplary. It is this prestige and confidence that it is now up to those in power to restore. While there is still time.