At this point, only one party more or less acts as a political force – the Armenian Revolutionary Federation. The party’s positions on some matters are not acceptable for me, personally, but understandable, because they contain some consistency. ARF is against the Armenian-Turkish Protocols (I think that it was right signing them), and when the president recalled them from the National Assembly, the party welcomed the move. ARF is in favor of “wanting the lands from Turkey” (It seems to me, it will not lead to any practical results, and vice versa, will weaken our position) and has welcomed “the centennial Declaration” with this spirit.
ARF is in favor of the parliamentary system of government (I think that under the current political conditions, it will impede the normal functioning of state institutions) and now is fighting for the constitutional amendments to be implemented in that direction. I cannot accept the views of the Dashnaks, but it is also not possible to miss mentioning that they are included in some system, and the party’s steps are directed towards getting those ideas to life. Whether it is possible or not, will it bring benefit or cause damage to our country, that’s another matter. But I repeat, what ARF wants is quite understandable.
Specifically with regard to constitutional amendments, there are two options for the behavior of the parties, a/ participate in discussions and try to extract the maximum, which corresponds to the ideas of the particular party, b/ not to participate in the discussions, not to have ideas, vision, and persistently repeat the 20-year claim for “regime dismissal”, which, apparently, will have the same practical consequences for another 20 years, a “land claim” by some Federation. For the first approach, it is possible to achieve, for example, the reforms in the Election Code, providing leverages, etc. to the opposition by legislative level. The efficiency of the second approach is zero – perhaps the assessment of “principality” by a few dozen people.
However, in the case of the first approach, the efficiency cannot be higher unless the parties, at first inside, and then consulting with each other, do not reach an agreement of what they want and what they demand for the government in terms of constitutional amendments. If they require different things, then the government would not do any “reform” move.
Read also
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
