NEW FORCE, NEW OPPOSITION-3
Hakob Badalyan

Lragir.am
15/01/10

The conversations on the need to create a new force, new opposition
which again activated after the election at the Constituency No.10,
questions like from where such a force has to appear, whether Armenia
has such resource and in general which the reason is why a new force
is needed when there is the Armenian National Congress which struggles
against the regime and which force will be better than the HAK are
often heard.

All the questions are usually on the emotional plane. The point is
that ideas on something new in Armenia fit into physical conceptions.

In other words, saying a new force, new people or a new format and
new ideas are imagined. No one seems to understand new behavior, new
thinking in saying a new force. Just like they understand "assault"
when saying "work".

In reality, the conversations on a new force and new opposition are
artificial and superfluous. In politics, new and old is so relative
that dwelling on them is just wasting of time. The best proof of
it is the 2007 year. After Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s political return,
the opposition that was formed could not be called new because of
the lack of physical grounds. Neither the slogans, not the faces nor
the circumstance of being opposed to the current government or their
ideas were new.

But the opposition headed by Levon Ter-Petrosyan was in fact new
because the qualities of the action of the opposition were new. It
was perhaps the first time when the opposition instead of active work
showed organized strategy and tactics and though their aim to make
a change of government failed, the fact that this opposition was the
most effective during the history of the independent Armenia is sure.

Hence, the conception of a new force does not suppose for new figures
or parties. In politics, the force which manages to satisfy the need
of the society the best becomes the very new force. From this point,
the conception of a "new force" must suit this logic. Strange may seem,
but it does not oppose the existence of the Armenian National Congress
because the Congress is able to find the new force in itself because
it has many layers which is its richness. But the "new" may be formed
from "outside" too.

Anyway, the fact that the party satisfying the public needs is less
than the one which does not satisfy it is evident. Consequently,
those who are ready to take up this hard task and do what the Congress
did not do are to get engaged in this work of course if they have
enough courage and abilities. I am not mentioning "courage" because
work means "assault". Merely, in Armenia being opposition requires
bravery because the governmental system in case of a vital opposition,
responses immediately in accordance with its survival instinct. How
this instinct will be expressed is difficult to predict.

Criticizing the government system is one thing and struggling against
it in practice is a completely different thing. And despite the
dynamics and tactics of the struggle, as soon as the government feels
the vitality of the struggle against it, it will response very toughly.