Less than two weeks are left for the parliamentary elections, and we will have a new National Assembly with the newly elected electoral system according to the new Constitution. But we will not have the answers to main questions irrespective of the outcome of these elections. Where will the de facto authority be in Armenia: in the National Assembly, in the Government or in the RPA? And in the face of who? The question is not in the dimension of personalities but a political responsibility. Including, a political responsibility for the most important decisions in the future. This means that the domestic political process that kicked off ahead of the elections has nothing to do with the elections, and it will not end with the elections. The posture of political entities in this sense seems strange since an impression can be created that a new and unbelievable act will commence both in the country and in their life on April 3.
While the act that commenced a few months ago can unnoticeably cross this small border line of the elections scheduled in April and be continued with its internal logic, having an unpredictable epilog for all of us in an entirely different period, which therewith has no connection with the schedule of the electoral cycle. Against this background, the RPA’s concealed anxiety becomes completely understandable, and the “Security and Progress” motto obtains certain Freudian nuances, in other words, betraying the concealed fears and neuroses which have occurred not from good life. Do you know who will lead the government in the next five years? RPA does not know either. No, it knows that Karen Karapetyan will begin to lead it. But it is not a fact that he will continue and will last five years. At least Karen Karapetyan himself is talking about it with “ifs”. In that case, where and in what “office” will Armenia’s de facto power “sit”? Again in Baghramyan 26 or Melik-Adamyan 2, who knows, may be in quite a different place which makes no sense to predict, and most importantly, in the face of whom, about which the same Serzh Sargsyan does not say anything concrete to the public. In this respect, the “post-election” formulation obtains quite a different meaning, which traditionally is perceived as a street protest, a civil rise, disagreement with the de jure outcome of the election and so on. Definitely, these “post-election developments”, in a broad sense, can be accompanied by such factors which can be an accompanying background but not motivating. Of course, if there are no force majeure situations that will shock the entire post-Soviet territory. Well, if the addressees of the existing question do not come to a common denominator, there are no force majeure situations, let the issue take, let’s say, its course in the hope that “the day will come and the goodness with it”, then what will happen next? This is already the case when let’s say we leave the “progress” aside but in terms of security, we are facing serious challenges, and we cannot overcome it by the upcoming elections because it does not contain such an “option”, because the political field is not so much degenerated to be equivalent to the real agenda of the society and the state.
Unfortunately, the society is receiving predominantly destructive and hysterical impulses from the political field for now. These impulses will definitely hamper the politically active segment of the citizens to become a subject dictating the agenda of the domestic political process. And the political mass building their jugglery on the emotions or the affected groups will not spare anything for this internal status quo remains unchanged. For not very big but anyway, for the healthy segment of the political field, it is very important, on the one hand, not to succumb to the temptation to join these emotional manipulations. On the other hand, they are well aware of the source and the nature of true challenges facing the country, as well as the beneficiaries to deviate from them, the inducements and circles of those who currently act with calls for “rising” who have worked and served without rising during the former presidents, the current role players who parasitize on these challenges. Consequently, it remains only not to remember that life, including political, will continue even after the elections, to save the political “bullets”, not to succumb to deception or self-deception temptation and try to give an adequate answer to the remaining unanswered questions after the elections. The test of political responsibility will occur here too. Also, apparently, about the political success.
