Is this the main motto of “non-ruling” movement?
During the rally with regard to March 1 tragic events, the opposition orators were “gently” refraining from mentioning of who was the president of Armenia on 1 March 2008 and the chief commander of the armed forces, who commanded to use violence against peaceful protesters, declared a state of emergency and restricted freedom of expression. I suppose that evading the name of the second president is one of prerequisites, under which PAP was to support conducting the rally.
Of course, no matter what the speaker is saying, the very fact that thousands of people are gathered in Liberty Square is very positive. Otherwise, the authorities may come out of the public control and further worsen the already severe economic situation. The Parliament speeches (right or wrong), as well as regular rallies compel the government not to lose vigilance, and not to think that people are happy with it. So, the activeness of “non- ruling” MPs both in the Parliament and in the streets is welcomed.
However, in perspective, if the target is truly systemic changes rather than a fight for the prime minister’s and ministers’ portfolios, any “non-governing” movement needs certain ideological basis rather than just curses addressed to the incumbent president. If the claim, which says “they are thieves, and we are not” is an ideological basis, no one will believe in it (the second part of the wording). If praising the Customs Union and rejecting the European integration is the basis, the difference between the stances of “non-ruling forces” and the current power is not clear.
Read also
Anyway, the problem here is deeper. If the mottos of “non-ruling” movement are “Long live Comrade Putin!,” “Forever with Russia,” it is doubtful that such movement can achieve systemic changes. In Ukraine, and earlier in Georgia, people had come out against the corrupt government, whose supporters are in Moscow, who are in numerous “business” ties with Moscow. Just as Armenia’s today’s authorities. Moreover, the 1988 movement in Armenia very quickly understood that the Karabakh issue can be successfully achieved only after getting rid of the Empire and becoming an independent factor. This movement was not anti-Russian, the best sons of Russian people were beside us. Anti-imperialistic, yes, because the very Empire are interested in having a weak and corrupt government in their “suburbs”.
If I understand all of these, Levon Ter-Petrosyan understands it 100 times better than me. The first president can not have dishonest intentions (he can, of course, be wrong), he can also pursue private interests. He, certainly, clearly understands that his current line will “at the best” bring Kocharyan to power. As to why he more prefers Kocharyan to the incumbent President, I do not know. Frankly speaking, I do not understand.
I would not be surprised if someone mistakenly tries to hold a poster saying “Fee and independent Armenia” during the next “non-ruling” rally, he will be asked to put the poster down. Putin may get offended.
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
