Western countries – the United States and the European structures, are working with “civil society” (in plain language: the NGOs) of countries like us. By saying “countries like us”, I mean not only the post-Soviet area, such countries exist in Asia, Africa, Latin America and even in Europe (former “socialist camp” countries). The goal of the cooperation (again, in plain language: giving money) is not necessarily to be a “color revolution”, “destruction of national description” or, if we speak about the post-Soviet area, easing the Russian influence. All this is possible but as a “side effect,” often highly desirable for the West.
However, both positive and negative emotions should be seen in every person, organization or country’s activities. Even if a person is considered to be an arch-enemy, his deeds can be a sobering and orienting effect. The West is not our enemy. Its goal could be finding partners in given country who exerting a certain pressure on their governments would make these countries more predictable, more advanced and ultimately more civilized. The West needs it as much as we do. In any contact, it seems to me, it is necessary to find points where the interests coincide rather than constantly emphasize the disagreements. To the point, when the US ambassador speaks about the corruption in Armenia, we should not be upset. The ambassador, of course, is talking driven from the interests of his country. But isn’t the reduction of corruption in our country driven from our interests?
Russia, moreover, is not our enemy, not to mention about the matters where our interests coincide. But this country does not work with the civil society, in accordance with the traditions of the Russian state, the work is being conducted only with the governments. In the case of Armenia, there is also perhaps the confidence that we anyway are in their pocket – there’s no getting away from it (никуда не денутся). Maybe this is true for my fellow-generations, many of them are ready to “jump over the people’s face” if the latter would all of a sudden say that Putin is perhaps wrong in some matters. But in the case of the next generations, such self-confidence is unnecessary. In the presence of unprecedented access to information sources, it is unlikely that young people will be oriented towards Russia. Let’s take at least the fact that Russian is not a second language for many of them (unfortunately, a significant part of them does not know the “second language” at all).
Under these conditions, Russia does nothing to advocate its values and its truths. Sometimes, Russia is displeased with the activities of the NGOs and calls for to punish them.
Read also
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
