Within the United States government team, there are two differing views on the war with Iran. Some of Trump’s backers and a segment of the economic elite believe the war should continue. The motives are fairly straightforward: big business is interested in money, especially when it is tied to oil. As in the case of Venezuela, controlling oil “flows” promises substantial profits—and in this case also the weakening of the main economic rival, China. This position is articulated by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
There is also an opposing view: the large-scale war should be brought to an end—deliver a few final strikes, then declare that the primary objective has been achieved: Iran has been significantly weakened and can no longer capable of developing nuclear weapons or threaten Israel. This view is held by the more ideological wing of conservatives in Republican Party circles around Donald Trump.
They point out, in particular, that during his campaign, Donald Trump criticized the administration of Joe Biden for getting entangled in costly and, in their view, unnecessary wars thousands of kilometers away. Now, in the name of Israel, he is doing essentially the same. According to this group, the Make America Great Again (MAGA) slogan means focusing inward—above all the economy and technology—and competing with China through political and economic means. This viewpoint is embodied by U.S. Vice President J. D. Vance.
The existence of differing opinions within the inner circle of a country’s leader is normal: the leader can weigh them and arrive at a conclusion—right or wrong. This is how it works in many countries; it used to be the case in Armenia as well.
Read also
Now it is not so in Armenia. It is hard to imagine any member of Civil Contract Party publicly expressing a view that deviates even half a millimeter from the theses of their “boss.” For example, saying that the campaign against the Church does not serve the interests of the state—or, broadly speaking, even those of Civil Contract Party itself. On the contrary, the party’s second-tier figures (and everyone besides Nikol Pashinyan is secondary) shout even louder: “yes, they are terrorists, yes, they are KGB agents, pedophiles,” and so on. On the other hand, one can easily imagine the kind of hysteria Nikol Pashinyan would fall into if any party member were to voice an independent opinion outside party labeling. The next moment, an SMS would arrive.
Aram ABRAHAMYAN
