The closer to the “hot autumn”, fierier become the rumors about possible conflicts between the non-governmental Four and inside it. As a point of disagreement, the attitude to constitutional amendments is mentioned. Actually, the constitutional theme here, I think, has nothing to do.
As to what the constitutional amendments contribute to preservation of the regime or the power, I do not understand it so well. The power can be preserved or changed under any Constitutional terms. During the 1990 parliamentary elections, the Soviet constitution and other laws, seems, did not obstacle PANM to receive majority in the Supreme Council, and thus, actually come to power.
Changing the power requires specific internal and external conditions, which either exist or do not exist, regardless of whether Gagik Harutyunyan’s headed committee is making a tour to the towns and villages of Armenia and meets with “soviet-like meetings of party activists” or not. Thus, making constitutional amendments a subject for discussion of disagreements or agreements by the Four, or generally include the issue in the political agenda, it seems to me is not reasonable.
It’s another matter to what extent the members of the Four agree with each other on the original issue of changing the power. In this issue, I think, radicalness by four political parties is reverse comparative to the presence of businesses and money in them. Our “political-economic” system is as such that the money-owners cannot be radical revolutionary. Of course, in recent years, there is some progress here. If during Robert Kocharyan’s tenure, there appeared “non-governmental” businessmen, then the second President would clench his fists, would stretch his neck muscles and would do everything to destroy them. However, this is a personal, so to speak, difference of characters, whereas the system remains the same. The power structures: tax, customs, and the courts, serve not for the state, but the authorities, they are intertwined with it, and they fulfil their will. Under these conditions, the words “big businessman” and “authority” are almost synonyms.
Read also
It is here that we need to seek for the roots of disagreements by the Four, let’s say, the ANC wants to start a revolution, but it does not have the resources, whereas PAP has the resources, and for this very reason it does not want a revolution. The first one want to radicalize the second one, roughly speaking, to “instigate,” and the second one want to hold back the first one. It is necessary for the four parties to come to an “average version” and continue their cooperation. The public is interested that it be so, at this point we do not have any other opposition.
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
