Now, various estimations are voiced addressed to Nikol Pashinyan, ranging from super admiring up to swearing. His activities may be liked or not. For example, I as an apolitical man, did not feel good at his harsh attacks on the first president. But I understand that it is a political process, each one has its own interest, and in this fight, as they say, pilaf is not distributed. And even it does not matter what goals Nikol pursues and what he contributes to Nicole. Another vital issue is much more important. Who will be able to ensure at least relative rule and order in Khorenatsi Street: the NA MP, the taxi driver or Ani? Who will be able to prevent the possible provocations: the “reverend grandfathers” or the “civil agreement”?
Which is safer for us, the citizens: the protesters raising their hands or the “ISIS look” having young people with covered faces and half-naked? I think that the answer to these questions is obvious. For those whom, in the end, it does not matter who is or will be sitting in which chair, it is important that there are no further casualties and the situation is “one way of the other” is resolved peacefully. (As to what are the consequences of imposing forced resignations of the president, I have already written about it yesterday and do not want to be repeated. My task is to warn). Nikol Pashinyan’s speech, apart from “hurting” Ter-Petrosyan was traditional. I have heard such speeches since 1992 when David Vardanyan and Arshak Sadoyan were “at the microphone”. Since then and until now, the rhetoric starting from “selling Karabakh” and ending with “plunder and looting” has not been changed. Perhaps, the type of the problems has not been changed too if this rhetoric is so much liked by our citizens. The problems are the same over 25 years, plus the “emerged” legitimacy issue after 1995, and it is quite normal that the number of years has given, as they say, a “cumulative effect”, and people are just “fed up” with constantly recurring situations. As to what this attempt will lead to, we will see soon.
Here, Russia’s attitude to the events evolved in Armenia is new and quite an interesting element. First, MFA Press Secretary Ms. Zakharova said that these events somehow obstacle the Nagorno-Karabakh talks, and then yesterday, the Foreign Ministry published a comment that the EU has not condemned the seizure of the Police Patrol Regiment in Yerevan “as appropriate”. To be honest, I have a question in this respect: why are you bothered about the international organization estimating the events evolved in another state? Concentrate on selling weapons to Azerbaijan and representing its interest on Karabakh issue.
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
If the government gives in to the demands of the Daredevils of Sassoon, what is to stop another group from doing the same thing six months from now, taking hostages and demands things?
That the regime is bad, corrupt, ineffective, incompetent, there is no doubt about that. But armed insurrection is not the way to go about affecting change in a civil society. Now matter how frustrating, hard, confusing and long-term the principals of peaceful political activism must be affirmed and insisted-upon. The principal of “rule of law” is preferable for a civil society than the “rule of gun”.