Tweet
DILEMMA OF KARABAKH OPPOSITION
Naira Hayrumyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/country26935.html
Published: 15:19:01 - 23/07/2012
After the elections in Karabakh, the topic number one has become the
formation of the opposition. MP Vitali Balasanyan, who received about
the third of the votes, stated that it would be expedient to set up
a political force which would reflect the interests of the 30% of the
population who is dissatisfied with the activities of the government.
Right after the elections, head of the NKR committee of Helsinki
initiative 92 Karen Ohanjanyan issued a statement calling to dissolve
the parliament and create a new one which would correspond to the
new alignment of forces. It is noteworthy that a number of Armenian
experts predicted the formation of an oppositional group in the
homogenous parliament of NKR.
Karabakh~Rs parliament was elected in 2010 and in order to ensure
opposition representation there, it is indeed necessary to dissolve it,
which is actually impossible, or to set up an opposition group through
a ~Schirurgic intervention~T. Vitali Balasanyan, who does not belong
to any party, was a member of the ARFD non-opposition parliamentary
group, but he was ~Sleft out~T from the group after he had accused
the ARF of supporting the acting president.
There are two more groups in the parliament ~V Democracy and Free
Homeland, as well as a group of independent MPs called Artsakhatun.
Among these deputies, there will surely be people who would like to
join Vitali Balasanyan and declare themselves opposition.
But these are only technical issues; the important is the true
intentions of the authorities and the opposition. It is clear that the
outcome of the elections, despite the sincere and strong competition,
turned out ideal for Bako Sahakyan. He won receiving at the same time
the image of a democrat. Only the opposition in the parliament lacks
for the ~Scompletion of the democratic image~T, but it may appear soon.
Bako Sahakyan will hardly create obstacles to this, moreover, his
task is to ensure a platform for the next presidential elections.
So far, the opposition in Karabakh, which has somehow existed, was
not institutionalized. On the one hand, the lack of representation
in the parliament was seen as a weakness, on the other hand, it
provided the full independence of actions. The authorities could not
control the opposition because it was not formalized in a party. No
accident, in his interview to Analitikon monthly, Bako Sahakyan noted
that ~Scertain public and political figures and organizations which
consider themselves opposition, not only do not form an opposition
force in accordance with the accepted standards but they prefer
to deal with non-constructive criticism ... In our country, all the
conditions for the existence of institutional and classical opposition
are created and the authorities not only don~Rt prevent it, but and
are interested in forming such a force~T.
Actually, the appearance of an oppositional force in the parliament
is expedient from the point of view of the democratic image of the
country, political awakening of Artsakh, but also it will legitimize
Bako Sahakyan~Rs authority. However, taking into account the fact
that parliamentary elections are due in Karabakh in three years and
presidential elections in five, and Bako Sahakyan won~Rt have the
chance to run for the third tenure, the formation of an opposition
wing in Karabakh may become the basis of the true democracy in Artsakh.
But it will happen only in case the opposition is not satisfied with
the 30% result but goes on working our alternative, adequate and
urgent projects of development of Artsakh. This is valid for the
political and economic policies which need conceptual transformations.
Currently, the principle is ~Shere is a piece of bread, take it
and don~Rt interfere in the politics~T, does not work anymore. New
proposals are necessary.
Naira Hayrumyan
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/country26935.html
Published: 15:19:01 - 23/07/2012
After the elections in Karabakh, the topic number one has become the
formation of the opposition. MP Vitali Balasanyan, who received about
the third of the votes, stated that it would be expedient to set up
a political force which would reflect the interests of the 30% of the
population who is dissatisfied with the activities of the government.
Right after the elections, head of the NKR committee of Helsinki
initiative 92 Karen Ohanjanyan issued a statement calling to dissolve
the parliament and create a new one which would correspond to the
new alignment of forces. It is noteworthy that a number of Armenian
experts predicted the formation of an oppositional group in the
homogenous parliament of NKR.
Karabakh~Rs parliament was elected in 2010 and in order to ensure
opposition representation there, it is indeed necessary to dissolve it,
which is actually impossible, or to set up an opposition group through
a ~Schirurgic intervention~T. Vitali Balasanyan, who does not belong
to any party, was a member of the ARFD non-opposition parliamentary
group, but he was ~Sleft out~T from the group after he had accused
the ARF of supporting the acting president.
There are two more groups in the parliament ~V Democracy and Free
Homeland, as well as a group of independent MPs called Artsakhatun.
Among these deputies, there will surely be people who would like to
join Vitali Balasanyan and declare themselves opposition.
But these are only technical issues; the important is the true
intentions of the authorities and the opposition. It is clear that the
outcome of the elections, despite the sincere and strong competition,
turned out ideal for Bako Sahakyan. He won receiving at the same time
the image of a democrat. Only the opposition in the parliament lacks
for the ~Scompletion of the democratic image~T, but it may appear soon.
Bako Sahakyan will hardly create obstacles to this, moreover, his
task is to ensure a platform for the next presidential elections.
So far, the opposition in Karabakh, which has somehow existed, was
not institutionalized. On the one hand, the lack of representation
in the parliament was seen as a weakness, on the other hand, it
provided the full independence of actions. The authorities could not
control the opposition because it was not formalized in a party. No
accident, in his interview to Analitikon monthly, Bako Sahakyan noted
that ~Scertain public and political figures and organizations which
consider themselves opposition, not only do not form an opposition
force in accordance with the accepted standards but they prefer
to deal with non-constructive criticism ... In our country, all the
conditions for the existence of institutional and classical opposition
are created and the authorities not only don~Rt prevent it, but and
are interested in forming such a force~T.
Actually, the appearance of an oppositional force in the parliament
is expedient from the point of view of the democratic image of the
country, political awakening of Artsakh, but also it will legitimize
Bako Sahakyan~Rs authority. However, taking into account the fact
that parliamentary elections are due in Karabakh in three years and
presidential elections in five, and Bako Sahakyan won~Rt have the
chance to run for the third tenure, the formation of an opposition
wing in Karabakh may become the basis of the true democracy in Artsakh.
But it will happen only in case the opposition is not satisfied with
the 30% result but goes on working our alternative, adequate and
urgent projects of development of Artsakh. This is valid for the
political and economic policies which need conceptual transformations.
Currently, the principle is ~Shere is a piece of bread, take it
and don~Rt interfere in the politics~T, does not work anymore. New
proposals are necessary.