COUNTRY STATUS CHANGES
Armen Tsatouryan
"Hayots Ashkharh" Daily Newspaper
6 Nov 07
Armenia
The two Presidents’ extramural debate
The part of the Opposition which has united around ex-President
Ter-Petrosuyan realizes very well that the real ratio of forces is
not to their benefit, and they will definitely be defeated in the
elections. That’s why they have committed themselves to the realization
of the goal of changing the country’s atmosphere by all means.
In 1990, the situation in Armenia could really allow for a change
of the political atmosphere in a few months’ time and hence result
in a change of the ratio forces as well. Let’s at least remember the
depressive situation characteristic to the economic crisis of those
years and the resulting nihilism and general atmosphere of distrust
which allowed the factions opposing President Ter-Petrosyan to change
the ratio of forces existing in the country.
However, Armenia is currently living in conditions of quite different
political, economic and social developments, and President Robert
Kocharyan confirmed this in his recent speech at the Yerevan Medical
University. The President expressed confidence that the country simply
faces no danger in terms of changing the existing ratio of forces. "The
status of the country has changed. There is no longer the malice that
generally existed in the country, the depressive situation which could
provoke people to indecent actions as well as the illogical steps. And
the politicians and the political factions that will try to follow
this variant will simply go bankrupt," R. Kocharyan mentioned.
And really, Armenia currently lacks the critical mass of dissatisfied,
totally bankrupt people who are ready to run after any "savior". In
the past, the more aggressive and attacking attitude the activists
and forces adopted towards the authorities, the greater chances for
victory they had.
Therefore, after Mr. Ter-Petrosyan submitted a political claim having
felt the effectiveness of such methods on his own back, it is quite
natural and logical for R. Kochayan to remind him that Armenia is
currently in the 21st century.
And it is not accidental that for substantiating his viewpoints, the
President points out to the perfect failure of the political forces
that adopted a more aggressive attitude. "The parliamentary elections
clearly showed that the politicians who behaved most aggressively
were not elected to the Parliament. This is the best way to estimate
the right way of manifesting oneself in politics at present." Having
returned to politics after 10 years’ silence and placed his political
pledge on the malice and nihilism characteristic to the 1990s, the
ex-President is reminded in this way that it is impossible to engage
oneself in serious politics based on the values of the past.
R. Kocharyan’s assessment with regard to the country’s current
situation does not absolutely testify to the fact that he has
overlooked the complex problems faced by Armenia in a qualitatively
new stage, the most important among them being the social polarization
and hence – the extreme inequality of the population’s economic means,
which very often results in loss of faith in justice.
On the contrary, it is this kind of situations that strictly
necessitate the existence of a serious opposition whose "absence is
also a mischief for the country." The thing is that, based the analysis
of objective situations, R. Kochayan has clearly distinguished the
necessity of having an opposition in the country from the attempts
of increasing one’s political capital by aggressive conduct.
Stating these two contradictory assessments regarding the country’s
political and economic situation that has become the subject of
the extramural discussions between the country’s former and current
Presidents, we can come to the conclusion that we are actually dealing
with ideas belonging to two different epochs. The sharp change of
the ratio of forces of which the ex-President and his political
team are currently dreaming was really possible in conditions of the
hard social and economic problems faced by Armenia at the beginning
of the ’90s. However, it is also obvious that having overcome the
sharp political and economic crisis and entered the 21st century,
our country found the favorable-reformist ways of solving so many
new and complex problems faced by us.
L. Ter-Petrosyan’s ideas about the politically unstable and
economically collapsed Armenia of the 1990s come in conflict with the
approaches of President R. Kocharyan, who possesses full information
on the country’s real situation.
The former places the political pledge upon the impressions and
recollections of the past and the latter – upon the real values of
the current situation.