Tweet
WHAT IS OPPOSITION IN ARMENIA?
Hakob Badalyan
Lragir.am
15 May 06
The word "opposition," which seemed to be gradually eluding the word
stock of the Armenian public and political thought, reappeared after
the secession of the Orinats Yerkir Party from the coalition and
the resignation of Speaker Arthur Baghdasaryan. The reaction of his
colleagues in the coalition, already former colleagues, was not as
strong, at least it did not appear as such, as the opposition parties,
at least those who appear as such (opposition, not political party).
The public, the political circles and the mass media were not
interested in the reason of this step of the Orinats Yerkir, its
likely impact on further processes as deeply as in the fact how the
opposition would accept the Orinats Yerkir. This is, in fact, a very
important question. But first it is important to find the answer to
another question, without which any answer to the previous question
would be far from being true. What is opposition? And if we narrow
the scope of the question, and put the question as follows: what
is opposition in Armenia? It is nothing but a group of people who
appeared in power for different periods of time or have kinship ties
of various degrees with government in power at different times. They
cannot even get on well with one another, for at different times
and for different periods were they in power, and each of them tends
to think that they deserve to return to power, because they had the
shortest stay in power and, what is more, without nepotism.
In other words, the biography of the present opposition does not
differ from that of Orinats Yerkir in a single episode. Moreover,
Orinats Yerkir itself rejected power. Whereas there is not a force in
opposition, which resigned from government offices on their own will,
except the National Democratic Union. Most probably, this is the reason
why it is beyond the opposition to insist on the government to resign
on their will, for they are reluctant to establish a precedent.
Hence, the notion of opposition is not distinct in Armenia, especially
that one can learn about its existence in front of Matenadaran, only
when weathermen predict sunny weather or sun with rain. They say press
and television are closed for them. But when they used to be in power,
not only the press and television were open for them. Consequently,
it is hard to imagine how such an amorphous being is going to make
a definite decision on accepting or rejecting some force. If the
opposition is able to make decisions at all, it should make decisions
on more important things, much more important than accession or
rejection of the Orinats Yerkir Party.
There is the other side of the question. In what political system is
it accepted to hold entrance exams for opposition or government?
Usually, in normal countries elections are held, and the society
decides which force should be opposition, and which one government.
And finally it is the society that decides the fate of political
forces. Opposition or government are not clubs where people are
accepted for some fee or social status. And it is at least surprising
that the representatives of the opposition, self-denying devotees
of democratic values, speak about the possibility and conditions of
accepting a political power, which rejected government (repentance,
confession, etc.), on the public channel and the Republic of Armenia
Official Newspaper, where the doors are allegedly closed before them.
But did the Republic Party repent, if the majority of its members
are to blame for the electoral fraud in 1998? Did the People's
Party repent, if the majority of its members allied in 1999 with the
falsifiers of the election in 1998? And finally, did the opposition
repent or apologize to the society for the disappointment caused by
their innumerable vows for a revolution or constitutional ways.
Repentance and apology to the society for even the smallest mistake
are, in fact, very important, and in this sense it is not a pity
to provide airtime. However, it is necessary to repent in turn for
a proper repentance. And it is the society that should decide the
order. I personally rely on the memory of the society only for everyone
to "lift the weight" in turn. It will eventually become clear who is
forgiven and whose time is up.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Hakob Badalyan
Lragir.am
15 May 06
The word "opposition," which seemed to be gradually eluding the word
stock of the Armenian public and political thought, reappeared after
the secession of the Orinats Yerkir Party from the coalition and
the resignation of Speaker Arthur Baghdasaryan. The reaction of his
colleagues in the coalition, already former colleagues, was not as
strong, at least it did not appear as such, as the opposition parties,
at least those who appear as such (opposition, not political party).
The public, the political circles and the mass media were not
interested in the reason of this step of the Orinats Yerkir, its
likely impact on further processes as deeply as in the fact how the
opposition would accept the Orinats Yerkir. This is, in fact, a very
important question. But first it is important to find the answer to
another question, without which any answer to the previous question
would be far from being true. What is opposition? And if we narrow
the scope of the question, and put the question as follows: what
is opposition in Armenia? It is nothing but a group of people who
appeared in power for different periods of time or have kinship ties
of various degrees with government in power at different times. They
cannot even get on well with one another, for at different times
and for different periods were they in power, and each of them tends
to think that they deserve to return to power, because they had the
shortest stay in power and, what is more, without nepotism.
In other words, the biography of the present opposition does not
differ from that of Orinats Yerkir in a single episode. Moreover,
Orinats Yerkir itself rejected power. Whereas there is not a force in
opposition, which resigned from government offices on their own will,
except the National Democratic Union. Most probably, this is the reason
why it is beyond the opposition to insist on the government to resign
on their will, for they are reluctant to establish a precedent.
Hence, the notion of opposition is not distinct in Armenia, especially
that one can learn about its existence in front of Matenadaran, only
when weathermen predict sunny weather or sun with rain. They say press
and television are closed for them. But when they used to be in power,
not only the press and television were open for them. Consequently,
it is hard to imagine how such an amorphous being is going to make
a definite decision on accepting or rejecting some force. If the
opposition is able to make decisions at all, it should make decisions
on more important things, much more important than accession or
rejection of the Orinats Yerkir Party.
There is the other side of the question. In what political system is
it accepted to hold entrance exams for opposition or government?
Usually, in normal countries elections are held, and the society
decides which force should be opposition, and which one government.
And finally it is the society that decides the fate of political
forces. Opposition or government are not clubs where people are
accepted for some fee or social status. And it is at least surprising
that the representatives of the opposition, self-denying devotees
of democratic values, speak about the possibility and conditions of
accepting a political power, which rejected government (repentance,
confession, etc.), on the public channel and the Republic of Armenia
Official Newspaper, where the doors are allegedly closed before them.
But did the Republic Party repent, if the majority of its members
are to blame for the electoral fraud in 1998? Did the People's
Party repent, if the majority of its members allied in 1999 with the
falsifiers of the election in 1998? And finally, did the opposition
repent or apologize to the society for the disappointment caused by
their innumerable vows for a revolution or constitutional ways.
Repentance and apology to the society for even the smallest mistake
are, in fact, very important, and in this sense it is not a pity
to provide airtime. However, it is necessary to repent in turn for
a proper repentance. And it is the society that should decide the
order. I personally rely on the memory of the society only for everyone
to "lift the weight" in turn. It will eventually become clear who is
forgiven and whose time is up.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress