Politicians, commentators and other interested political persons are discussing what the Quartet will do on September, and whether it will succeed to dismiss Serzh Sargsyan (unless, of course, there is indeed such a goal). Those who are very concerned about this matter, can certainly make assumptions, and perhaps many of our citizens believe that the “bad plundering” guys should be replaced by “good, people-thinking” guys, and everything will fall into its place: three apples will fall from the sky, one and half to the tale storytellers, one and half to those believing them.
As for the possibility of change of power, then we should just keep in mind that the current ruling political team is now the Kremlin’s “major players”, and the Quartet is the Kremlin’s “substituting staff”. If a change of power occurs, it would not be the result of four, five, or “people’s” heroic struggle, but a change initiated by the Kremlin, which occurs, I emphasize, within the same team. That would mean that today’s team on the playground “has not implemented the instructions by the coach well”.
It has particularly nothing to do with our original problems. To the thinking people, I would suggest to consider not these “internal replacements” whether they are possible or not, whether Poghos would be kinder and more decent that Petros, but how can our lives be changes in the presence of the current “main” and “replacement” team.
These changes are possible only when the team players feel the need for it. Tigran Sargsyan tenure shows that otherwise is impossible. I am far from idealizing the former prime minister, he has committed numerous sins, perhaps, also crimes. However, in 2008, he came with an intention to make “reformations”.
Read also
Why was nothing “reformed”? If we “shutdown” our emotions and the “gang” sympathies and antipathies, and try to honestly answer the question, then the explanation would be the following: the willingness of “reformation” faced fierce resistance of oligarchy. It does not matter how the oligarchy call themselves: RPA, PAP or non-partisan. The important thing is that the oligarchy has enough administrative, organizational and informational resources, to overthrow and discredit any attempt of reform. Conclusion: we need to implement such reforms, which, on the one hand, will contribute to the progress, on the other hand, will not contradict the interests of the oligarchy. Is it possible? I do not know the answer; let the economists give the answer.
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
