IN NATIONAL UNITY THEY KNOW WHO PUSHED BUSINESSMEN TO LEAVE ORINATS YERKIR
Lragir.am
26 May 06
Unlike the fight of the National Unity and the Orinats Yerkir Party in
the National Assembly, seasoned with vulgar phrases, the debate
between Hovanes Margaryan, Orinats Yerkir, and Aghasi Arshakyan,
National Unity, on May 25was civilized. `In the framework of
politeness,’ as Aghasi Arshakyan said. No, of course, the parties were
`armed’ with facts, arguments,documents; there were accusations but
the speakers addressed each other `dear Aghasi,’ `dear Hovanes,’
`brother,’ `darling’ and with other similar phrases.
In the beginning Aghasi Arshakyan reported that what happened between
Orinats Yerkir `was artificial and directed by a third party.’ In
answer to the question of Lragir.am `why did you yield to the
provocations of the third party?
‘Aghasi Arshakyan announced that the National Unity had not been
provoked, they expressed their stance. The most important thing is,
according to Aghasi Arshakyan, to find out who benefits from this
situation. `If we get the answer to the question, everything will be
clear.’ And who benefits? Aghasi Arshakyan believes that tensions
between Orinats Yerkir and the National Unity were kindled by Hmayak
Hovanisyan. Hmayak was in the faction of the National Unity but then
he left. The National Unity is not going to assume responsibility for
`then,’ said Aghasi Arshakyan, mentioning that this atmosphere is
beneficial for the `present president and people around him.’ The
National Unity does not have anything against Orinats Yerkir. They
simply want Orinats Yerkir to answer the question `who is responsible
for this state in the country?’ and suggest that they `repent, admit
their fault, apologize.’ `An honest person need not go through
purgatory,’ Hovanes Margaryan cited Arthur Baghdasaryan.
As it could be predicted, the debating sides often repeated what the
leaders of their parties had stated during the debate one the
eve. Orinats Yerkir always called things by their names, Serge
Sargsyan does not fund the National Unity. And as usual, first there
were words of praise for their political party, then accusations
against the other followed. Hovanes Margaryan: `When the opposition
boycotted the National Assembly, as part of the coalition, we were
criticizing, doing the job of the opposition. Where were you when they
were coercing the Orinats Yerkir members of parliament who joined the
initiative of the residents of Buzand Street to lodge a complaint with
the Constitutional Court?’ Aghasi Arshakyan: `An opposition issupposed
to criticize what is bad, and the force in power should try its best
to improve the situation.’ Arthur Baghdasaryan has a high
international reputation, says Hovanes Margaryan. Yes, agrees Aghasi
Arshakyan, adding that the opposition also helped to promote his
image. The parties agreed that there had been pressure on the
businessmen-members of parliament who left Orinats Yerkir from Robert
Kocharyan administration. But if in Orinats Yerkir they do not know
where exactly the pressure came from, Aghasi Arshakyan knows,
`Armenchik Gevorgyan coerced’: either you lose your businesses or you
leave Orinats Yerkir. Hovanes Hovanisyan assures that `Orinats Yerkir
is becoming stronger. Compared with 84 members leaving the party over
the past month, 1800 became members.’ `Quantity is one thing, quality
is another,’ immediately followed Aghasi Arshakyan’s remark.
The two political spheres, the government and the opposition, belong
to people, and people know which political force should be in this or
that sphere, people should decide through their votes; the debate
between Aghasi Arshakyan and Hovanes Margaryan, which passed in the
framework of `politeness and partnership,’ ended in the logic of this
idea expressed in the beginning of the debate and handshaking.