When living in Armenia you follow up the events, willy-nilly, you get into the details, comment on them, agree, dispute and so on. When you leave the country for at least three days, it does not matter whether on business or for a rest, you begin looking at your own country and its problems with another look. In particular, you begin doubting whether all the events that seem so important at close sight actually are of so much crucial significance.
The foundation of our media field is the dualism: pro-government and opposition, yes and no, revolutionist and counter-revolutionist, went to the president and did not go to the president. Based on this, the X expresses an opinion about the Y, and then we, the journalists, are pushing the latter to respond to this opinion, and since the Y wants to “give a tit for tat,” he gives his “worthy counterattack.” And so it goes. Thus, the “information” consists mainly of attacks and counterattacks.
But the themes of such “uncompromising struggle” are often petty and secondary. If you follow our life by considering only this struggle, then the impression is that Armenia is located out of the planet, and we are “stuck into” the provincial swamp. Interestingly, the Internet and, particularly, social networks, which theoretically had to overcome all the boundaries, deepen this provincialism in us.
We seem have taught our readers not to be seriously interested in what is going on in the world, and what place our small country takes in all these. Because, in this respect, we are also “stuck” in “EaEU-EU”, “outpost-non-outpost” dualism and we do not think what additional opportunities we have beyond this contrast. Let us be honest, some things are imposed on us, including the EaEU, but there are things that we can do without going against these compulsions.
Read also
In my opinion, Iranian and Chinese directions create such opportunities. These countries are not Russia’s enemies, they are independent and are not part of the new “cold war”, on the other hand, especially recently, they do not strain relations with the West. It seems to me that these approaches underlie the economic pragmatism, which will possibly be “unloaded” from the ideology and the so-called “geopolitics.” The people who one way or another can orient the public must dispose them to the economic pragmatism rather than the dualism and incurred squabbles.
When you are outside Armenia, it becomes more obvious.
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
