Tweet
LIMIT OF CHOICE
11:41:29 - 25/03/2010
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments-lr ahos17287.html
The expressions of some disagreements between Serge Sargsyan and
Robert Kocharyan, which the public has been witnessing recently,
aroused the question whether this disagreement is true or whether it
is a game they are playing for some purpose. Which is the aim of the
disagreement in both cases?
Can there be any disagreement between Sargsyan and Kocharyan? This
idea fits into the conscience of the public with difficulty, moreover,
the opposition has always tried to persuade the society that Kocharyan
and Sargsyan act jointly pursuing the same goal - to keep the power
and their wealth.
Of course, this observation contains some truth and objectivity, but
when it is rendered an unequivocal affirmation, it becomes clear that
the latter does not consider the greater part of objective realities.
The point is about the power and its `consequences' as well as
geopolitical realities, which are very expressively present in the
events taking place in the Southern Caucasus. All this creates quite a
different situation to the past decade, when Robert Kocharyan and
Serge Sargsyan ruled with a harmonic interest.
Home political events in 2008, post-electoral developments,
reformations taken place in the imagination of the public, the change
of status quo in both governmental and oppositional fields brought
about completely new home demands. Absolutely new demands are coming
from the external world too, where serious changes of thinking and
positions happened. The world economic crisis adds to all this. All
this changes the conditions under which the Armenian government is to
work. In addition, the power, which was being formed in
Kocharyan-Sargsyan format with ideas about the future decade, did not
even imagine such changes could ever happen.
The point is that the new environment imposes demands only to the
formal government, in other words, Serge Sargsyan. Consequently, he
has to deal with the environment or with Robert Kocharyan. Even if
Kocharyan is very strong, Serge Sargsyan will not come out to be so
naïve to doubt the fact that the environment is stronger. The problem
is that in order to find common language with one of them, you need to
contradict the other. This is the peculiarity that the new environment
brought for the Armenian government.
Judging by Serge Sargsyan's behavior so far, he is trying to offend
neither the environment nor Robert Kocharyan, although feeling of not
having resources to confront neither the one nor the other side. On
the other hand, it is obvious that this cannot last forever, because
it does not rule out that common ground can be found between the
environment and Robert Kocharyan, the more so, in anticipation of the
electoral period in Armenia.
Meanwhile, new realities and requirements may well be a platform for a
new game of Kocharyan and Sargsyan. Maybe, Serge Sargsyan has made the
choice in favor of Kocharyan, but decided to show it in the form of
imitation of differences. So it is not excluded that Robert Kocharyan
and Serge Sargsyan intend thereby to increase the immunity system in
communication with the environment and to create safeguards under
which, if Serge Sargsyan feels unable to resist external and internal
pressure can be put across orderly change of power and gain of time.
But the version of the game, perhaps, is the most unlikely one, since
it is unclear where the players take a resource of public trust, which
enables them to influence the demands of the international community
and the dictation of the environment.
HAKOB BADALYAN
11:41:29 - 25/03/2010
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments-lr ahos17287.html
The expressions of some disagreements between Serge Sargsyan and
Robert Kocharyan, which the public has been witnessing recently,
aroused the question whether this disagreement is true or whether it
is a game they are playing for some purpose. Which is the aim of the
disagreement in both cases?
Can there be any disagreement between Sargsyan and Kocharyan? This
idea fits into the conscience of the public with difficulty, moreover,
the opposition has always tried to persuade the society that Kocharyan
and Sargsyan act jointly pursuing the same goal - to keep the power
and their wealth.
Of course, this observation contains some truth and objectivity, but
when it is rendered an unequivocal affirmation, it becomes clear that
the latter does not consider the greater part of objective realities.
The point is about the power and its `consequences' as well as
geopolitical realities, which are very expressively present in the
events taking place in the Southern Caucasus. All this creates quite a
different situation to the past decade, when Robert Kocharyan and
Serge Sargsyan ruled with a harmonic interest.
Home political events in 2008, post-electoral developments,
reformations taken place in the imagination of the public, the change
of status quo in both governmental and oppositional fields brought
about completely new home demands. Absolutely new demands are coming
from the external world too, where serious changes of thinking and
positions happened. The world economic crisis adds to all this. All
this changes the conditions under which the Armenian government is to
work. In addition, the power, which was being formed in
Kocharyan-Sargsyan format with ideas about the future decade, did not
even imagine such changes could ever happen.
The point is that the new environment imposes demands only to the
formal government, in other words, Serge Sargsyan. Consequently, he
has to deal with the environment or with Robert Kocharyan. Even if
Kocharyan is very strong, Serge Sargsyan will not come out to be so
naïve to doubt the fact that the environment is stronger. The problem
is that in order to find common language with one of them, you need to
contradict the other. This is the peculiarity that the new environment
brought for the Armenian government.
Judging by Serge Sargsyan's behavior so far, he is trying to offend
neither the environment nor Robert Kocharyan, although feeling of not
having resources to confront neither the one nor the other side. On
the other hand, it is obvious that this cannot last forever, because
it does not rule out that common ground can be found between the
environment and Robert Kocharyan, the more so, in anticipation of the
electoral period in Armenia.
Meanwhile, new realities and requirements may well be a platform for a
new game of Kocharyan and Sargsyan. Maybe, Serge Sargsyan has made the
choice in favor of Kocharyan, but decided to show it in the form of
imitation of differences. So it is not excluded that Robert Kocharyan
and Serge Sargsyan intend thereby to increase the immunity system in
communication with the environment and to create safeguards under
which, if Serge Sargsyan feels unable to resist external and internal
pressure can be put across orderly change of power and gain of time.
But the version of the game, perhaps, is the most unlikely one, since
it is unclear where the players take a resource of public trust, which
enables them to influence the demands of the international community
and the dictation of the environment.
HAKOB BADALYAN