Stepan Safaryan has a foreboding of a continual migration, since “Yelq” does not bring up the issue of leaving the EEC either
During the interview with “Aravot” a proportional candidate of “Free Democrats” party Stepan Safaryan admitted that if “Free Democrats” and “Yelq” had united, their results in the RA parliamentary elections would be higher. We asked Mr Safaryan whether this issue had initially been discussed. Mr Safaryan replied, “Of course, there was such an issue. If “Yelq” and “Free Democrats” united, they would make a firmer and stronger team”. Stepan Safaryan explained that he had not had any involvement in the negotiations carried out between the political powers, and he could not claim what had been done wrong, and why those two powers did not unite. However, he assured, “The bigger was the union, the stronger would the association of victory and power be, and the better the resources would be utilized”. To our question what hindered the two powers to unite, howbeit, Stepan Safaryan answered, “Mrs Anahit and I have had the privilege to receive an offer from both sides. We agreed to be on their list, for the sake of partnership and of the many common plans we had with “Free Democrats”. However, we did not ask about the reason for not unifying neither from our friends of “Bright Armenia” nor of “Free Democrats”, nor “Civil Contract” or “Republic”.” We stated that most of the powers who won in the parliamentary elections have more pro-Russian orientation, and asked whether this infers that our society is more pro-Russian. Mr Safaryan replied, “These powers have collected votes in the ranked system of elections, where no pro-Russian, anti-Russian, or pro-European ideas have been discussed. If you believe that Arayik Grigoryan, Karen Karapetyan, or Samvel Aleksanyan have brought up the issue of “Europe or Russia” in their electoral districts, I would agree with you. Yet, let us state that this was a competence and choice between money and more money. It is another thing that the political powers for which those candidates received votes are in the pro-Russian field”. Stepan Safaryan assured that people like not Tsarukyan’s views but his money, not RPA’s plan but the money, and that they were afraid of repressions. Mr. Safaryan noted with regret, “This was not a choice between programs or ideas. The calculation was done in a way that mainly pro-Russian powers would form the parliament. Anyway, unfair manipulations affected as well. In recent days, various surveys were published, as if “Free Democrats” was not winning, weakening the associations connected to the victory of that power”. To our question what dangers the pro-Russian parliament generally contains Mr. Safaryan gave the following answer, “I see dangers in further continual migration of the RA, since “Yelq” does not bring up the issue of leaving the EEC either”. Mr Safaryan reminded that during 2007-2012 “Heritage” was highly pro-European, and as “Yelq” does not bring up the issue of leaving the EEC, this means that tragedies will deepen. “I am afraid that EEC and EU position that “Yelq” holds might impact on the RA’s foreign policy vector.”
Tatev HARUTYUNYAN
