There are different types of revolutions. I do not know how this is scientifically called, but the difference in attitude towards the history and the past of the country is obvious. For example, Robespierre or Lenin did not care what the rules were during the Tsarist regime or the Bourbons, respectively. They did not have any respect for state institutions, such as the Duma or the Constituent Assembly, created during the “previous regime”, and dispersed these institutions, guided by revolutionary “laws”. They also did not bother about finding some “legal” justifications for killing kings and their families.
It is simply impossible at the end of the 20th century and especially in the 21st century, the revolutionaries need both internal and external legitimacy. The forces that came to power in Myanmar, the Philippines, Egypt, Tunisia, Georgia, Ukraine, Armenia did not and do not have any desire to cross out the current laws. The logic is as follows: although the current Constitution, the existing laws are bad, anti-national, etc., the processes should take place within the framework of those constitution and laws, otherwise, an uncontrollable situation may arise. I believe this is the right logic, although some radical groups are aiming at the “Robespierre-Lenin” solutions. But “transitional justice” would inevitably lead to guillotine, the victims of which would eventually become revolutionaries themselves.
This principally right, “legitimate” behavior of the current government is not smooth, from time to time there are revolutionary deviations, for instance, the demarche of not inviting the Republicans to Sardarapat, or extremely radical statements by ministers (while one should act first, and then speak it out). However, I think these are temporary manifestations that will be overcome in a few months.
There is another more interesting question: how is it possible to dissolve the National Assembly within the framework of the current Constitution and hold extraordinary parliamentary elections? The only legal way is to reject the government’s program, to which the Republican majority, as far as I understand, is not inclined. If the government, for example, blocked the roads, forcing them not to accept the program, it would be a little bit strange.
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
