While the skinheads killed one more Armenian in Russia and left the scene of the crime screaming “Russia!”, Aram karapetyan was organizing rallies in Armenia with the same slogan “Russia!”. Besides that he argued not to take the Russian military forces out of Javakhk by saying that they were the main security guarantee of Armenians there.
Karapetyan has a rather strange picture of Armenians. He thinks that our people have only one mission: they must always stay with Russia like a dog with its owner and must hold back anyone from trying to make its owner leave the place (because if the owner leaves other people may beat the people there, who are not protected at all).
Probably this is the reason why he organizes rallies during the hot summer and in cold winter, says slogans about Russia and is surprised why no one besides him does the same to show their gratitude to Russia.
Of course, during Aram Karapetyan’s rallies there aren’t more than 50-60 participants there: even those that are too far from politics understand the politics led by this amazing politician. Generally, skinheads don’t act against only Armenians, but against all dark-skinned people. Anyone can look at this as a dogma. But on the other hand, they’d better understand that there is no difference for them whether they are a partner for Russia or not, they would better understand that to have dark skin doesn’t mean anything than their general approach to all people who have dark skin. Besides that, as we know, the Armenians that were attacked on the dark streets of Moscow were not even able to pronounce any slogans telling anything about the friendship of our nations.
Does this mean that Armenia, as a state, must protect the interests of Armenians living in Moscow? It is very amazing, but in such cases the Armenian political parties don’t say a word and say that the people murdered were originally Armenians, but citizens of Russia. But as soon as they speak about Javakhk, they forget that the Armenians living there are citizens of Georgia. And when they speak about Russia, their approach changes: “It is impossible to make multi-color revolutions in Armenia because the united opposition doesn’t have a leader, they don’t have financial support, etc.”
Ukrainians started a revolution because they wanted to get separated from Russia, i.e. become independent. Why shouldn’t they do that? They have Russia on the East, and developed Europe on the West. And in that situation Ukraine had to make a choice: either to continue being a small brother country for Russia, or become the biggest country of developed Europe. Georgia chose this and started a revolution too. But why shouldn’t they do this if they were in war both with Abkhazia and Southern Osia and Russia was supporting them against Georgia?
Why are we bringing this up? There is no reason to start a revolution in Armenia; it’s illogical. According to the logical explanations that we have, Armenia can’t be independent from Russia because it is impossible to have a multi-color revolution here (there is no financial support, no leader, etc.). But in fact it is the vice versa: Armenia doesn’t want to be independent from Russia; that is why it doesn’t want to have any multi-color revolutions (accordingly there is no financial support, no leader, etc.). As for those people who argue that we should develop Western democracy in our country and at the same time stay with Russia, they are lying. This can’t happen. It is impossible to build a democratic state and at the same time be the “military base” of a country, where in the midday criminal groups kill people just because of the color of their hair and know that the police don’t really fight against such crimes.