“That Raffi Hovhannisyan came out of the Presidential Palace and didn’t say anything to the people gathered about the meeting was not right, in my opinion,” political scientist
Yervand Bozoyan described R. Hovhannisyan’s steps during a conversation with www.aravot.am. Then he added: “The people expected him to say what result that meeting had yielded. At least briefly, he should have presented what had been discussed. At the end of the day, Raffi Hovhannisyan’s resource is society’s trust. He should have presented to the people in a couple of sentences and said why he wanted to express his opinion the next day. Just from the tactical perspective, Raffi Hovhannisyan didn’t do the right thing. It turns out that a meeting behind closed doors and backstage negotiations are more beneficial for the government. From the tactical perspective, the government won more points than Raffi Hovhannisyan.” The political scientist doesn’t think it is bad that Raffi Hovhannisyan is ready for negotiations. However, he notes: “Firstly, he shouldn’t have said something like that publicly. We realize that R. Hovhannisyan is an honest man, but one shouldn’t make public everything so honestly. I would understand, if he did so with three-four people, but this was about a huge crowd who had voted for Raffi. I think R. Hovhannisyan is inexperienced in terms of acting quickly, and he gains that experience while on the move. He really makes mistakes, and he should do everything necessary not to make any more mistakes in the future.” Political scientist Levon Shirinyan thinks R. Hovhannisyan makes the right moves and states: “I think it is a good thing. You have probable noticed that he is quite prudent. Sometimes one can lose control over emotions and say everything, and R. Hovhannisyan was balanced and thoughtful. Perhaps, he will consult his entourage; we don’t have to hear everything. The process is positive. When an opposition leader who has won unprecedented votes talks with the president, it can be only too favorable to our republic and people. Our people have been used to demagogy since the 1990s. Whereas this work style is better than that of the squealing members of the Karabakh Committee who would appear and go into hysteria. What is the problem? One can sit down, speak calmly and settle the issue. Tens of thousands of people are concerned about Raffi’s successes and failures. One thing is obvious; there is envy among the so-called political elite.”
Tatev HARUTYUNYAN
