“I don’t think that the Pan-Armenian National Movement (PANM) needed to change its name. Let us not forget that it was a ruling party of the 3rd republic, and all its positive and negative influences notwithstanding, it was a historic party. Establishing a party Armenian National Congress (ANC) is dictated by the time and the situation, but I think that all of us try to find solution, which will allow the opposition movement to act more effectively,” Lyudmila Sargsyan, an ANC MP, said to www.aravot.am, talking about the observations made by Mr. Makeyan today that the party ANC that was to be established was for the functionaries of the ANC central offices, because they had difficulties with joining the PANM. “There has been some disagreement between Petros and our Armenian National Congress political council; they went a bit too far regarding that subject. The opinions that have been expressed don’t, as it were, correspond to the reality. And I think that Petros Makeyan presented the situation a little more extreme, and the commentaries that he makes regarding the establishment of the party ANC; I don’t share that opinion. The political council didn’t play the same role, didn’t make decisions with the same unanimity; it cannot continue like that, our work becomes inefficient. In order to make the work of the opposition movement more effective and the decision-making more purposeful, the situation requires the supporters and the activists to become more united and wage a more purposeful struggle against the system,” Ms. Sargsyan proceeded. Opposing Mr. Makeyan’s claims that when they had tried to put forward their party’s package on bailing the ANC out of the crisis, they had found out that the Congress was more afraid of discussion and public speeches, she said: “Petros hasn’t been in the political council for a long time; today he builds his opinion on assumptions. All members of the political council and I wanted yesterday to see the program of reforms, which he had been talking about for months. Why didn’t he bring it and put it forward at the political council, perhaps the proposal would have been acceptable for us, and we would have tried to modernize the program of reforms and work in that direction? He, as well as a few other people who had taken that line, didn’t come, and we didn’t find out what program he was talking about, after all. Constructiveness will strengthen us more than division. We have never been afraid of discussion; we have even stated several times that if it was realistic and applicable, we were ready to compromise. I am starting to think that perhaps he doesn’t have that package.”
Arpine SIMONYAN
