Tweet
MARCH 1 TOPIC: PRESENT OR OBEDIENCE
Hakob Badalyan
LRAGIR.AM
11:31:48 - 11/06/2009
The order to dissolve the fact-finding group to study the March 1
assassinations, which was signed by Serge Sargsyan, may be considered
a proof of strengthening of his positions or just the contrary:
their weakening. If Serge Sargsyan dares to stop the activities of
the fact-finding group, this may mean that he is strong enough not
to need even the imitative revelation of the March 1 crimes. However,
today the effectiveness of the expression of the public mood, in which
the opposition has to be engaged, is very low. The public complaint
is very little in this case. It has to be voiced and it has to become
a factor. Serge Sargsyan does not have any worry not to be understood
in Europe either. In case of the fact-finding group, he thinks he is
invulnerable, strong and, consequently, dares to close the group and
create grounds to close the whole case gradually.
But as any phenomenon or object, the fact-finding group has the
opposite side too. Consequently, what is there on the opposite side
of the group is not unessential, because it may be real aspect
of the question. It was not so difficult to understand that the
existence of the March 1 topic dwelt on the question relating to
not only the government-public, government-European structures, but
also government-government plate. The March 1 issue is a question,
which deals with the period of presidency of the previous president
Robert Kocharyan, in the course of which, the role of the current
president Serge Sargsyan is much undetermined. It is noticeable that
Robert Kocharyan and Serge Sargsyan had problems in redistributing
the governmental levers.
In order to solve these questions, the March 1 topic was a strong
weapon in Serge Sargsyan's hands. At least, he could make Robert
Kocharyan nervous with leakages on the March 1 issue, at the same time,
showing to the system, how he becomes the owner of the pyramid.
Closing the March 1 topic, or initiating its closure, either Serge
Sargsyan proves that the factor of Robert Kocharyan does not exist
for him any longer, or the ghost of his return went back into
the "cemetery", or this entire proves just the opposite. In other
words, Robert Kocharyan's factor played a role here: seeing that the
fact-finding group may come out of control and it really started to
make him nervous, Robert Kocharyan forced Serge Sargsyan to close
the topic.
Of course, it is difficult to state which version is closer to the
reality. A third version is also possible to exist, or many other
versions, one of which, for example, may be the one that Serge
Sargsyan decided to give a present to Robert Kocharyan in connection
with his son's marriage, which took place on June 6. This may also
prove that Serge Sargsyan feels very confident if he gives such kind
of courageous presents.
But, Serge Sargsyan himself is also possible to be interested in
the closure of the March 1 topic. Because the continuation of that
topic may have revealed the unknown circumstances of his role in the
March 1 events, which will harm the image of the tolerant person,
which Serge Sargsyan is trying to create for him.
Hakob Badalyan
LRAGIR.AM
11:31:48 - 11/06/2009
The order to dissolve the fact-finding group to study the March 1
assassinations, which was signed by Serge Sargsyan, may be considered
a proof of strengthening of his positions or just the contrary:
their weakening. If Serge Sargsyan dares to stop the activities of
the fact-finding group, this may mean that he is strong enough not
to need even the imitative revelation of the March 1 crimes. However,
today the effectiveness of the expression of the public mood, in which
the opposition has to be engaged, is very low. The public complaint
is very little in this case. It has to be voiced and it has to become
a factor. Serge Sargsyan does not have any worry not to be understood
in Europe either. In case of the fact-finding group, he thinks he is
invulnerable, strong and, consequently, dares to close the group and
create grounds to close the whole case gradually.
But as any phenomenon or object, the fact-finding group has the
opposite side too. Consequently, what is there on the opposite side
of the group is not unessential, because it may be real aspect
of the question. It was not so difficult to understand that the
existence of the March 1 topic dwelt on the question relating to
not only the government-public, government-European structures, but
also government-government plate. The March 1 issue is a question,
which deals with the period of presidency of the previous president
Robert Kocharyan, in the course of which, the role of the current
president Serge Sargsyan is much undetermined. It is noticeable that
Robert Kocharyan and Serge Sargsyan had problems in redistributing
the governmental levers.
In order to solve these questions, the March 1 topic was a strong
weapon in Serge Sargsyan's hands. At least, he could make Robert
Kocharyan nervous with leakages on the March 1 issue, at the same time,
showing to the system, how he becomes the owner of the pyramid.
Closing the March 1 topic, or initiating its closure, either Serge
Sargsyan proves that the factor of Robert Kocharyan does not exist
for him any longer, or the ghost of his return went back into
the "cemetery", or this entire proves just the opposite. In other
words, Robert Kocharyan's factor played a role here: seeing that the
fact-finding group may come out of control and it really started to
make him nervous, Robert Kocharyan forced Serge Sargsyan to close
the topic.
Of course, it is difficult to state which version is closer to the
reality. A third version is also possible to exist, or many other
versions, one of which, for example, may be the one that Serge
Sargsyan decided to give a present to Robert Kocharyan in connection
with his son's marriage, which took place on June 6. This may also
prove that Serge Sargsyan feels very confident if he gives such kind
of courageous presents.
But, Serge Sargsyan himself is also possible to be interested in
the closure of the March 1 topic. Because the continuation of that
topic may have revealed the unknown circumstances of his role in the
March 1 events, which will harm the image of the tolerant person,
which Serge Sargsyan is trying to create for him.