In our country, wherever you cast your glance, you will see a “national disgrace”. Paid parking and reconstruction of the Indoor market are national disgrace, joining the Customs Union is a national disgrace, but not joining is equally tragic, because not joining, by the same logic, would mean yielding the West compelling homosexual marriages and totalitarian sects, and disrupt our national identity. How else can the disgrace be?
We lack for cold analyses, by giving bombastic, crunchy, ‘murderous’ characteristics to all phenomena, we consider our work completed, thinking that with these words, we have “beaten down” the political enemy, and now it will accept us of being wise and discerning. In this case, the answers to elementary questions are missing in all these exclamations, what does Armenia gain or lose by joining the Customs Union with regard to political and economic sector, which are positive and negative sides of the deep and comprehensive cooperation with the EU? Whether the first option really rules out the second one. Then, why were our authorities, particularly in the face of Tigran Sargsyan and Foreign Deputy Minister Shavarsh Kocharyan, in the period of months, denying the possibility of joining the Customs Union, have recently changed their position by 180 degrees? Did Putin oppress? And wasn’t he oppressing before, or would it occur to anyone that he will oppress?
I wish we had professionals who, without blaming or justifying someone, would give answers to those questions, dry, logical, and void of emotions. Of course, it would be desirable if the authorities elucidate these problems, as well. The explanations, first of all, should be made by the aforesaid officials as to why, under what oppression they changed their position. And here we get, in my opinion, to the most important issue. The authorities do not feel obligated to be accountable to our citizens, to explain the logic of their actions. The report should be given not to Putin or Catherine Ashton but the citizens of Armenia. To balance such actions of the executives, along with other balances, there is one institution called a Parliament. In any case, it must exist.
Nevertheless, in the name of justice, let’s add that these institutions are often formal in the West, too. For example, the U.S. President Obama applied to Congress and the Senate with the following issue: should I attack Syria or not. But, I am afraid, regardless of the position of the legislators, the decision was already been made.
Read also
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
