ArmInfo. Against the background of complete disunity and the inability of the opposition to unite efforts, we have to admit that there is no real political alternative to Nikol Pashinyan in Armenia. Chief Researcher of the IMEMO RAS, the President of the Scientific Society of Caucasian Studies Alexander Krylov expressed a similar opinion to ArmInfo.
"The Armenian Prime Minister distinguishes himself for his rather tough methods of fighting his political opponents. It is important to note that we are talking not only about the representatives of the" former regime ", but also about his potential opponents. In my opinion, Pashinyan's such policy, in spite of numerous forecasts about his imminent failure, brings its dividends and success. During his 2 years in power, of course, there were manifestations and discontent. However, I do not notice signs of radical changes in public sentiment, "he said. This state of affairs, according to Krylov, testifies to the prime minister's success in resolving socio-economic problems. At the same time, there is a slight decline in Pashinyan's popularity in Armenian society. The latter in addition to the coronavirus is explained by the slow pace of reforms and the unmet public demand for their acceleration and radicalization.
Against this background, the political scientist notes a radical change in the power model in Armenia. Pashinyan's coming to power publicly instilled Armenian politics with publicity that it previously seriously lacked. Before the "velvet" revolution, decisions were made in offices, on the sidelines, anywhere, but not in a public, open space. And according to Krylov, practically all the main political figures were participants in the backstage processes. Everyone who could not or did not want to play such games ended up outside the political process.
The political scientist compared the essence of such a model of power to the game of chess so beloved by Serzh Sargsyan. With one "but" - the former president simultaneously moved both white and black pieces on the board. And such a "game" could continue for a long time, given that it was conducted on condition of formal observance of the Constitution. And the country even held elections, the outcome of which, however, was initially shaped and determined by only one person, not the people.
"Thus, the change of power in Armenia from" chess "to public was the result of many years of violation of the rule of law and democracy, violation of the right of citizens to participate in governing the country. The instrument of Pashinyan's arrival in Sargsyan's place was the same mass protest of society. It is illegal in its form, but in its essence returned to the Armenian people, the citizens of Armenia the right and the opportunity to really participate in the management of the state> the Russian political scientist concluded.