Tweet
ONE OF THE REASONS FOR RESIGNATION
April 5 2014
There are no objective standards and mechanisms, which are used to
estimate the work of previous government or the prime minister.
Political parties have their own interests, and, naturally, their
estimations are far from being objective. The opposition usually
says that the Prime Minister has failed everything, whereas the
authorities are saying that the government change is a normal
process, and that this prime minister was necessary for this phase,
whereas for the current phase - a totally different one. Of course,
it's hard to argue that this government has recorded some notable
successes over six years. Much has been said about the failures in the
economic sector and still will be discussed. But, one of the reasons
for political failures, it seems to me, was the sense of the lack
of the team. In the initial stage of his office as Prime Minister,
Tigran Sargsyan was non-partisan, later he became a Republican. But
the influential people in RPA were not considering him their man;
there was a significant discrepancy in mentality. When neutral, but
concerned people were talking about deterioration of the economic
situation, some RPAs with intellectual and educational background (not
publicly, of course) were saying, "Well, what can I do, let Tiko fail,
he is not one of our brotherhood." When the oligarchs, MPs, senior
officials were having problems, do you think they were referring to
the prime minister. Of course, not. Consequently, the prime minister
was not a reputation for them, he was not the one to "resolving the
issue". I'm sure that they were not going to the sauna with Tigran
Sargsyan and were not spending time in "Dubai". In short, they were not
making friends, subconsciously feeling as "class enemy". Of course,
I am also reluctant to idealize Tigran Sargsyan and I assume that
he has committed the abuses "that were coming at hand". The matter
here is about the sense of "unified team". And, here, I think that
maybe the reason for the Prime Minister's resignation was not the
protracted struggle of "non-governments" against him, not the failure
of "I am against" initiative and the funded pension, not the Kremlin's
instruction (I do not know how much the Kremlin cares about who works
in the post of prime minister in Armenia), rather than simply Tigran
Sargsyan's comprehension that nobody supports him but the President.
And, lately the President does not support him as much as the Prime
Minister would like. This "team" factor, perhaps, should be taken into
account in the case of appointing future prime ministers. Although,
I would not like Armenia's prime minister be in harmony with Manvel,
Seyran, or Tokhmakh Mher.
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2014/04/05/164528/
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
April 5 2014
There are no objective standards and mechanisms, which are used to
estimate the work of previous government or the prime minister.
Political parties have their own interests, and, naturally, their
estimations are far from being objective. The opposition usually
says that the Prime Minister has failed everything, whereas the
authorities are saying that the government change is a normal
process, and that this prime minister was necessary for this phase,
whereas for the current phase - a totally different one. Of course,
it's hard to argue that this government has recorded some notable
successes over six years. Much has been said about the failures in the
economic sector and still will be discussed. But, one of the reasons
for political failures, it seems to me, was the sense of the lack
of the team. In the initial stage of his office as Prime Minister,
Tigran Sargsyan was non-partisan, later he became a Republican. But
the influential people in RPA were not considering him their man;
there was a significant discrepancy in mentality. When neutral, but
concerned people were talking about deterioration of the economic
situation, some RPAs with intellectual and educational background (not
publicly, of course) were saying, "Well, what can I do, let Tiko fail,
he is not one of our brotherhood." When the oligarchs, MPs, senior
officials were having problems, do you think they were referring to
the prime minister. Of course, not. Consequently, the prime minister
was not a reputation for them, he was not the one to "resolving the
issue". I'm sure that they were not going to the sauna with Tigran
Sargsyan and were not spending time in "Dubai". In short, they were not
making friends, subconsciously feeling as "class enemy". Of course,
I am also reluctant to idealize Tigran Sargsyan and I assume that
he has committed the abuses "that were coming at hand". The matter
here is about the sense of "unified team". And, here, I think that
maybe the reason for the Prime Minister's resignation was not the
protracted struggle of "non-governments" against him, not the failure
of "I am against" initiative and the funded pension, not the Kremlin's
instruction (I do not know how much the Kremlin cares about who works
in the post of prime minister in Armenia), rather than simply Tigran
Sargsyan's comprehension that nobody supports him but the President.
And, lately the President does not support him as much as the Prime
Minister would like. This "team" factor, perhaps, should be taken into
account in the case of appointing future prime ministers. Although,
I would not like Armenia's prime minister be in harmony with Manvel,
Seyran, or Tokhmakh Mher.
ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
Read more at: http://en.aravot.am/2014/04/05/164528/
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress