Tweet
The Society is Tired of Figures of '80ies
SIRANUYSH PAPYAN
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/interview21875.html
Published: 15:58:53 - 20/05/2011
Interview with ethnographer Hranush Kharatyan
The political situation of Armenia of the last one year has been many
times described as uninteresting and marshy. How would you describe
the current phase?
There are really changes, but returning to the most discussed and
interesting for the society issue - the power-opposition dialogue,
I would rather call it a power-HAK dialogue. Though the sides are not
inclined to calling it a dialogue (but Galust Sahakyan has twice said
it is), nevertheless, a conversation on certain ideas at the level of
discussions is underway. But I do not know whether the HAK expresses
the sum of various political approaches of people dissatisfied with
the power.
There is a big part of the society that does not share the ideas of
both the opposition and the power. Why is not a new force with other
ideas and approaches formed? Our previous interlocutor said those
two forces do not allow to. Do you agree with this opinion?
Of course, the society is used to see these two forces as those
expressing the main opinions. But there are many people within the
society who do not believe that the opposition can be a constructive
power, while following the opposition means to believe it will be a
constructive power, which will create a more positive country. I do
not think their existence hinders the formation of a new force. Today
many dwell on the creation of a third force but this causes smile.
Then why does the third force not created?
I think there are various reasons: there is some nihilism of
possibilities of influencing the course of events in the current
situation. I believe the society is tired. There cannot be a continued
atmosphere of political fight. There is another idea that it is
possible to influence on developments through indirect political ways
too. Not always, change of power, moreover through a revolution, can
bring about positive consequences. And finally it became a tradition
in Armenia when protest is expressed through emigration of people,
who could be not the organizers but at least the followers of the
third force. All these are the reasons but not the primary ones.
Do we have a problem of political leaders? All talks are around the
three presidents of Armenia.
A relative of mine has recently said that our society is already
tired of the political figures of the '80ies. All of our presidents
represent this generation and their behavior and decisions are similar
in some sense. These three figures have been our leaders and today the
society connects all its expectations with one of them. Maybe this is
the reason why there are no 4th and 5th names. Our experience showed
that every new figure should know the art of power, and there is some
fear that an inexperienced person needs time to get acquainted with
the art of politics. But this is not the primary reason either. The
first and foremost reason is the nihilism, the tiresome.
Do you think Robert Kocharyan's return to politics is real?
I do not rule out his return. Moreover, I think he has not left the
politics, but he just did what the Constitution demands. I am sure
he still has his role in the politics. I think our politics isolated
from us thanks to his efforts.
Will the March 1 be fully revealed?
I think it is possible, but the revelation depends on the relationship
and aspirations of two political figures - Robert Kocharyan and Serge
Sargsyan. If Serge Sargsyan thinks it is necessary and possible to do
that and isolates Robert Kocharyan from the ambience of danger, then
the March 1 will be revealed, if not fully, but as much as possible.
But I think it will never happen due to various reasons including
internal arrangements between those two people.
Will there not be sharp changes and developments?
Unlike the number of HAK representatives in the future parliament I
think there will be no change in the home and foreign policy life of
our country. There can arise issues of redistribution of property;
the same what we have now.
SIRANUYSH PAPYAN
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/interview21875.html
Published: 15:58:53 - 20/05/2011
Interview with ethnographer Hranush Kharatyan
The political situation of Armenia of the last one year has been many
times described as uninteresting and marshy. How would you describe
the current phase?
There are really changes, but returning to the most discussed and
interesting for the society issue - the power-opposition dialogue,
I would rather call it a power-HAK dialogue. Though the sides are not
inclined to calling it a dialogue (but Galust Sahakyan has twice said
it is), nevertheless, a conversation on certain ideas at the level of
discussions is underway. But I do not know whether the HAK expresses
the sum of various political approaches of people dissatisfied with
the power.
There is a big part of the society that does not share the ideas of
both the opposition and the power. Why is not a new force with other
ideas and approaches formed? Our previous interlocutor said those
two forces do not allow to. Do you agree with this opinion?
Of course, the society is used to see these two forces as those
expressing the main opinions. But there are many people within the
society who do not believe that the opposition can be a constructive
power, while following the opposition means to believe it will be a
constructive power, which will create a more positive country. I do
not think their existence hinders the formation of a new force. Today
many dwell on the creation of a third force but this causes smile.
Then why does the third force not created?
I think there are various reasons: there is some nihilism of
possibilities of influencing the course of events in the current
situation. I believe the society is tired. There cannot be a continued
atmosphere of political fight. There is another idea that it is
possible to influence on developments through indirect political ways
too. Not always, change of power, moreover through a revolution, can
bring about positive consequences. And finally it became a tradition
in Armenia when protest is expressed through emigration of people,
who could be not the organizers but at least the followers of the
third force. All these are the reasons but not the primary ones.
Do we have a problem of political leaders? All talks are around the
three presidents of Armenia.
A relative of mine has recently said that our society is already
tired of the political figures of the '80ies. All of our presidents
represent this generation and their behavior and decisions are similar
in some sense. These three figures have been our leaders and today the
society connects all its expectations with one of them. Maybe this is
the reason why there are no 4th and 5th names. Our experience showed
that every new figure should know the art of power, and there is some
fear that an inexperienced person needs time to get acquainted with
the art of politics. But this is not the primary reason either. The
first and foremost reason is the nihilism, the tiresome.
Do you think Robert Kocharyan's return to politics is real?
I do not rule out his return. Moreover, I think he has not left the
politics, but he just did what the Constitution demands. I am sure
he still has his role in the politics. I think our politics isolated
from us thanks to his efforts.
Will the March 1 be fully revealed?
I think it is possible, but the revelation depends on the relationship
and aspirations of two political figures - Robert Kocharyan and Serge
Sargsyan. If Serge Sargsyan thinks it is necessary and possible to do
that and isolates Robert Kocharyan from the ambience of danger, then
the March 1 will be revealed, if not fully, but as much as possible.
But I think it will never happen due to various reasons including
internal arrangements between those two people.
Will there not be sharp changes and developments?
Unlike the number of HAK representatives in the future parliament I
think there will be no change in the home and foreign policy life of
our country. There can arise issues of redistribution of property;
the same what we have now.