Three years have been passed since the “blessed timing” when Armenia allegedly had expressed the wish to put the negotiated EU Association Agreement aside and join Russia’s initiated and the so-called Eurasian Economic Union. The political forces are busy with the preparation of the elections, while it was necessary to sum up the “glorious” three-years and find the starting point from where the political process begins. Unless of course, it begins and if it really is a political process rather than a provincial circus on political themes. The Internet has stored the statements following days after September 3, 2013, as to how the then Secretary of the National Security Council, Artur Baghdasaryan, was stating that this is due to Armenia’s “security reasons”, while the economist-propagandists, without giving way to each other, began unanimously “justify” what goods are expected to us in this “united 170 million market.” The government and opposition politicians unanimously joined them, well, now see how we are expanding-deepening-enhancing our economic ties as a result of “inevitable” membership to the EaEU and how our security will be strengthened … Months later, Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan resigned who although publicly spoke against the EaEU membership in the Russian press, however, currently, he is the heads of the EaEU executive body. Afterward, as a result of the opposition “quartet”, we received the most oligarchic government during the 25 years of independence.
All the fairy tales about “becoming a bridge” between the European Union and this Russian “union” vanished because as economist Ashot Yeghiazaryan described, Russia demolishes even the existing bridges of Armenia. The “security considerations” led to the April full-scale war. Whereas Putin’s cynical lies about Armenia’s economic growth, which was denied by the head of the RA Statistical Service, is not worth even discussing. This policy is bankrupt and it is a fact. This is exactly the case when we were facing a dilemma like England in 1938 a shame or war, and we chose the shame and war at the same time, so farm a four-day war …
Who is going to bear the political responsibility for all this? Which are the political forces to bring to political account the authors of these decisions as well as the parliamentary “black hundred”, who constantly “punch” those decisions, and who had come to the Parliament with diametrically opposite pre-election promises to sign the EU Association Agreement? And is there the said political accountability on the political agenda of Armenia? What does the politically active part of the society think about this? This is the question of the questions today. The true changes in the country will begin based on this very question, or forget, no real change can be as long as this question is not in the center of the political process because this is where the issue of the model of the future state is determined.
Naturally, numerous false agendas are emitted into the political field in order to preserve this “Eurasian taboo” immunity. Including, calls like “800 hectares”, “no span of”, “decolonization” by armed political marginals; “Serge, leave!” without specifying who according to them will “come” afterward or “will come” for doing what, “neither Russia nor West but independence and sovereignty” without saying independence from whom and what happened to the sovereignty… yes, all this is there, the political field and trans-political orbit is flooded with the hue-and-cry of all this, as if all this has not happened. And it does not matter at all whether those going behind it are doing it consciously or without thinking to the end.
Read also
Is it not clear where all this leads. Talking about the “benefits of Eurasia” has already passed to a political satire and comedy genre. But when a factor is not functioning, which if does not deviate will at least inhibit the trends of this free fall, nothing will prevent for this comedy to become a tragedy. Here the political responsibility should appear. The political accountability first comes from the conscious of all this rather than from concealing or deception and self-deception, or resounding false agendas and nursing hope to steal something during the elections, and as the famous politician occupying a political position would say, truly “no wit is required” for such politics.
Today, Russia is no longer our ally nor we are its ally. We have become its hostage as a result of such politics, and it has become our number one threat. And all this is already superficial. … The 1938 Munich disgrace brought also a war to England and the Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain bore the full responsibility for such politics. He yielded his position two years later to the principle opponent of his political course, Winston Churchill, by leaving England alone against the big evil although returning the hope with his actions to the English … While the issue of the political responsibility remains open in Armenia.
Ruben MEHRABYAN
“Aravot”
