“The results of these elections first show that the people made a decision between two alternatives that they were served, and they believed that those two alternatives existed. The first alternative was the reproduction of Nikol Pashinyan’s government. The second was Robert Kocharyan’s return to power,” a professor at Lehigh University in the US and political analyst Arman Grigoryan said at the Article 3 club.
According to him, many considered this decision to be irrational because it is easy to defend that argument. “Nikol Pashinyan’s government is the author of a very heavy tragedy, and even prior to this tragedy, it did not have much to show as achievements. Therefore, the reproduction of such a government, and with such a large margin, raises a lot of questions, and many people think that it was an irrational choice or that a cult is being formed around Nikol Pashinyan.” Arman Grigoryan said that he is against those views. “I believe that the people saw Nikol Pashinyan as the most credible obstacle against the reproduction of the previous regime. The former regime was the return of slavery from the people’s point of view, which the people considered much more terrible than the return of Nikol Pashinyan, even if all the shortcomings were taken into account.”
As for not accepting the ANC message on being serious, Arman Grigoryan also noted, “There was a third alternative, and the people did not have to choose between the two, but partly using the propaganda and media opportunities, partly because the ANC, acting as the most credible alternative with a message of seriousness, entered the active political struggle too late. due to resources or lack of time, and was not able to convey the message to the public in a fairly good way. This is how I explain the election results and the failure of the third alternative.”
Gohar Hakobyan
