“Political opposition should not be an end in itself, but instead it should be based off of opposing views, ideologies, plans, and strategies. But our political system, over the past 30 years, has grown used to being against individuals and gaining political capital and ratings through constantly criticizing those individuals. Pashinyan is the prime example of such an opposition since the entirety of his legitimacy was based off of criticizing forces and individuals that have been deeply criticized by all layers of society and that had low ratings. Then, he was able to remove them from the government. However, it is a very cheap authority if it is not strengthened by positive and constructive achievements,” Artur Ghazinyan told Aravot in an interview regarding popular discussions on how an ideological fight cannot take place in parliament due to the fact that there is no strong opposition.
“If you would like me to clarify my thoughts, even more, I will use one example. It is obvious that the former system is actively being removed now, which, I must confess, I agree with. However, that is being removed in a chaotic manner. It is the same as if you destroy an old and condemnable building without having plans to build something new, which, as a result, you might destroy foundations that were built over thousands of years. It might take hundreds of years to renovate those foundations, if they are, of course, subject to renovation. It becomes a very dangerous situation when authority is stripped from structures that have a strong national identity, such as the Armenian Apostolic Church, Armenian traditions and cultural heritage, and the great Armenian dream, all in the name of personal authority. I won’t go further into national institutions, Armenia-Artsakh relations, and the way the Artsakh conflict resolution is being handled,” Ghazinyan said.
Emma Gabrielyan
