We, quite often, talk about one thing and write quite a different thing. We talk one thing under the walls and around the tables and quite different thing in official websites. I mean mainly to politics and political topics. I’m referring to almost all of us, but first and foremost, political and public figures and people who are directly related to politics and the state. We, the journalists, are not particularly an exception. When Hovik Abrahamyan was appointed prime minister and formed a government, many noted that the composition of the new government is composed mainly by Robert Kocharyan’s men and his disposed officials.
Many of us have certain political logic and some experience to guess and predict this fact, and especially politicians and particularly representatives of the opposition have such logic to distinguish the wet from the dry and Kocharyan’s and Serzh Sargsyan’s people from each other. They do distinguish it and talk about it, but mostly in the backstage, while they do not say anything official and from the NA tribune. The opposition was to speak, but it does not do it, and it is quite logical that the opposition does not speak, especially because the parliamentary opposition is against not so much Hovik Abrahamyan and the second president, but Serzh Sargsyan. At least, it leaves the impression. However, this is just one of the impressions and opinions. According to other opinions and other impressions, Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan are not opponents at all, on the contrary, they are in the same game and are playing the same game. In other words, Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan are misleading the society and especially the political forces by presenting opponents to each other. Such a belief not only exists, but also has the right to exist. The matter that prior to Serzh Sargsyan’s becoming president, the interests of the second and the third presidents coincided almost one-to-one is known to everyone. It is also known that Serzh Sargsyan’s becoming President, first, was the expression of will by Robert Kocharyan. But it is also know that after Serzh Sargsyan’s becoming president, some controversies arose between them. The majority of them, apparently, were personal. We also assume that a part of their controversies were political. It is undisputed that Armenia’s the most pro-Russian President was Robert Kocharyan, and although Kocharyan’s foreign minister Vardan Oskanyan was mostly speaking about complementarism, however, during Ter-Petrosyan tenure, Armenia’s foreign policy was much more complimentary, and personally, the first president having a pro-Western consideration was maintaing sound relations with Russian and Yeltsin, in person. Immediately after becoming president, Serzh Sargsyan also demonstrated evident aspirations of complementarism, and it seemed to be successful for some time, but the life proved and especially now that complementarism depends more on relations between Russia and the West than on us. Under Robert Kocharyan’s presidency, the relations between Russia and the West were much better than now, and there were wonderful opportunity and conditions for the display of complementarism, nevertheless, under Kocharuan’s presidency, the pro-Russian orientation and tendency by Armenia’s authorities was more than obvious, and the “property for the debt” arose during those years, and all my remarks are substantial reasons for some whispers among certain circles of the society about Kocharyan’s return. Such whispers and talks are caused by first of all Kocharyan’s and then his Speaker’s speeches and commentaries. In fact, Robert Kocharyan with his supporters and satellites has quite active participation in Armenia’s domestic political life and events, and, apparently, it would be not easy to stop him, especially in the event of becoming a full and equal member to the Customs Union.
Voskan YEREVANTSY
