It is true: Hunger strike strategy could work only in a country with a civilized regime. It doesn't seem to work with ours!

The 6 counties in Northern Ireland weren't "democratic" for the Catholic minority back in 1968 when the "Civil Rights" movement began in Derry that culminated in Bloody Sunday. One big difference is that the IRA and INLA hunger strikers had the overwhelming moral support of the people. The Catholic Church was also an active participant in the struggle as well.Today in Armenia, neither the Church or the masses, are out in force.

I would not compare Armenia and Ireland, since Ireland is a democratic country and Armenia not. The current democracy in Western countries and US is not perfect. Everybody knows that. I think hunger strikes are mostly for Armenians all over the world than Western countries since Armenians abroad are 4-5 times more than in Armenia. They can effect and change something in politics. It does not matther how are the methods of fighting. It is more important that they are continuing and periodic. I pray for fighters to be more strong and brave than before. God with you!

John, thank you for your insightfull artcile. It does touch upon a important point: Armenian leadership does not value individual human life. We all agree on that. When Serj sees these hero hunger strikers he probably thinks: "What a bunch of idiots. Let them all starve themselves to death. Who cares!" The question I have is the following: Why don't the democtratic media, including yours, voice this issue more strongly. Allow me to explain. These guys can only hope for any attention from Serj if they get international attention. They can only get international attention if Armenianow (& Armenialibery & A1Plus) helps them do so. They need to get the PR right. The media in West are unaware of the situation in Armenia but they get press dossiers and files and articles sent to them then they will wake up to it. What do you think? ps. for "me": Chill out dude. Michael is right you are misunderstanding the vocabulary. The stuff you say sounds off the point completey.

Well there isn't a difference between freedom fighters and azatamartikner, they are actually translations of each other. I didn't say there was, I don't know what you are talking about. I simply used the Armenian version of the phrase as there is slim to none chance that the nation branded them with the English one. I didn't attack anyone, real or imaginary...I said at the outset that I normally enjoy Mr. Hughes's refreshing take on the bizarre happenings in Armenia. I even share his opinion that the rotating hunger strike is a bit silly. What I did attack was Mr. Hughes's dismissive tone toward the freedom fighters and Yerablur which I found to be incredibly offensive. I don't deny that I'm over-sensitive to the issue; all Armenians understandably are, especially those who lived through the war and lost relatives, friends and neighbors because of it.

To "me," my friend you need to relax and control your emotions. Your indiscriminate attacks against everyone real and imaginary boggles the mind. Here you are accusing, better word will be "berating" Mr. John Hughes for disrespect(ing) our freedom fighters. What is the difference between "freedom fighters" and "azatamartikner," absolutely the same word and meaning. As for the use of "yerablur boys," there is absolutely nothing wrong calling them boys. Just relax, control your emotions and enjoy the article. RELAX MY FRIEND. People who utilize their emotions almost always fail to reach their objectives. Keep your emotion in check, and you will see things more clearly. Good luck.

Me, Your comment brought tears to my eyes. God Bless you.

Mr. Hughes, you usually have a refreshing perspective, but I demand that you show some respect to our war veterans. They don't "like to be called freedom fighters", the nation has branded them as that--azatamartikner, because while the rest of the world gets caught up in maddening diplomat-speak ("territorial integrity", "mutually acceptable solutions", "package deals" etc.), we Armenians remember the Gharabagh war for what it was: a fight over the right of the people of Gharabagh to self-determination, a right ironically granted to them by the USSR constitution but not the Western powers. So yes, the war vets were absolutely fighting for freedom; and if you'd like to for some reason, perhaps inadvertently, minimize their efforts, a quick visit to that cemetery you speak of (which you've deemed a less acceptable venue for the strikers than Proshyan ave)where a whole generation of Armenians lies would convince you otherwise. And the premise of the article is just fantastic: "Bobby’s slow suicide lasted 66 days. By comparison, the boys at Yerablur are hardly missing a snack." Way to insinuate that the opposition is "out of touch" because its members haven't been able to starve themselves to death. It is also important to note that there's a very specific, relatively small group of people doing this; they feel this is the only way to voice their disagreement. And to brand this as the "opposition" once again failing is a bit much. And really, does it take a genius or rotating hunger strikes to understand that anti-government sympathizers are desperate? You of all people should be aware of the obstacles and limitations that they face. It is always the easiest to criticize; what do you suggest they do? Nonetheless. Just as an aside, as I understand it, some of the Yerablur "boys" (as you inexplicably refer to them) some of whom are handicapped have been on strike for 11 days now. Only 55 days to go to be deemed "in touch".