THE ARMY OF POLITICAL SCIENTISTS REPLENISHED AGAIN KIMA YEGHYAZARYAN

Hayots Ashkhar Daily
Published on June 11, 2008
Armenia

"Of course I wouldn’t like any political speculations over my quitting
Dashnaktsutyun party. Because I held and continue holding the viewpoint
that Dashnaktsutyun is one of our national values; it is one of the
values of our political thought. It existed in the past, exists today
and will exist in future. No divergence of opinions is possible in this
regard. At least as far as my personality is concerned, I really can’t
imagine our political thought without Dashnaktsutyun. I possibly can’t.

It’s quite a different matter that there is a certain disagreement
with the present-day leadership of the party in terms of political
attitudes. And this has caused us to be represented in different camps
now," former parliamentarian ROUBEN HAKOBYAN announced in "Pastark"
(argument) club yesterday.

In response to the question what disagreements he had with
Dashnaktsutyun, the speaker said, "Dashnaktsutyun would have a
better representation if it didn’t form part of the coalition. Our
political arena would be more balanced if Dashnaktsutyun weren’t a
coalition party."

What is, after all, the former RA Consul in St. Petersburg going to
do after returning to Armenia? R. Hakobyan has nothing to hide because
as a public figure, he is going to be engaged in active politics. But
already in the status of a non-partisan. And in general, he rules
out the possibility of becoming a member of any party.

Mr. Hakobyan informed that a political-analytical center will soon be
registered with the relevant state agency by his initiative; the centre
will be engaged in political analyses and issue publicistic articles.

Touching upon the internal political problems, the speaker again
insisted on his well-known proposal as the only variant for overcoming
them.

R. Hakobyan believes that, "the post-electoral struggle is not
over yet.

Both the state of emergency and the subsequent developments did not
contribute to the internal political arena to overcome the tension." As
regards the "wondering subject", i.e. the dialogue, "unfortunately it
did not descend from the heaven; it did not become a reality. In my
deep conviction, the reason was that neither of the parties actually
had a sincere desire to have a dialogue with the other."

Although the lack of desire is obvious, there is one "plane" which, if
made available, may enable the parties to start a dialogue. R. Hakobyan
makes the following conclusion-prediction: "The plane on which L.

Ter-Petrosyan and the authorities may have a dialogue is, in my
opinion, being sketched. That is, finding one culprit who will meet
the requirements of the two parties. It looks as though this culprit
were Robert Kocharyan, as the former President. And it looks as though
this might enable the parties to start a dialogue.

Why? Because during the pan-national congress they dropped a very plain
hint that the President had nothing in common with the March 1 events."

Substantiating his conclusion-prediction, the speaker also noted,
"I don’t think any representative of the authorities would be against
this scenario."

Despite the prediction, the author believes that considering
R. Kocharyan responsible for and guilty of all this is not a requisite
condition for initiating a dialogue "so as it would be possible to
make an accurate assessment on the existing situation and enable the
state to overcome the tension through a dialogue."

So, there is one way out. "To organize extraordinary presidential
and parliamentary elections and hold them no sooner than in a year
and no later than in half a year."