The Ukrainian “blonde heads revolution” is in the process and it is
going along very smoothly and it follows the Georgian scenario. You
have the same thousands of people gathering at the central street, the
same slogans, the same Georgian settlements, etc. The only thing
different is that now you have Yulya Timoshenko instead of Nino
Burjanadze, the “Para” organization instead of the “Kmara” youth
organization, the “5th channel” television network instead of the
“Rustv-2” television network. The rest is all the same.
Now, it is not that important how the Ukrainian revolution will end.
Everyone knows that the fight is going on between Russia and the
Western world. It is no secret that both Russia and the West are going
after the same thing-establish supreme rule in Ukraine. The thing is
that it turned out that the West is doing that through the means of
humanitarian values (democracy, freedom of speech, human rights, etc)
while Russia is trying to get somewhere by disrespecting those same
values. As a result, a conflict has risen in Ukraine. It is a conflict
which is half ethnic and half leveled. In a word, in general the native
Ukrainians, intellectuals, students, representatives of NGOs and others
are on Yushenko’s side, while the native Russians and the Eastern
regions (primarily the mine diggers) are on Yanukovich’s side. But what
we are interested is one thing: how come Armenia failed in doing what
Russia, Georgia and Ukraine did?
There are many answers to that. First of all, Armenia lacked the
“ideological” way of battle. This means that there was no struggle
between Russian and Western orientations. There was a fight for who was
more Russian orientated. Secondly, the opposition could not come up
with one candidate. Thirdly, probably the most important reason, was
that the level of society (intellectuals, students) could not be found
in Armenia, the level of society that would participate in the
political struggle. It turned out that that level of society does not
exist at all in Armenia. Of course there are intellectuals and students
(we are certain of that because we have more of them than Ukraine or
Georgia), but there is no such thing as a “level”. For example,
recently one of the television networks asked the youth studying in
universities about their opinion on corruption in universities.
Everyone said that they were hearing about that for the first time. Pay
attention: they were not saying that there is no corruption in the
universities, but rather they claimed that they had not heard of such a
thing. This means that society has fully come to terms with all the
falsifications and is not even ready to talk about that. Obviously,
there can be no talk about having an organization like “Kmara” or
“Para”. The same goes for intellectuals who primarily prefer “not to be
blind” and have a look at our economic successes.
Of course, there are many other reasons. Armenian authorities had other
outlooks and had closed the “A1+” television network at the right time,
and so the “Armenian revolution” had remained without “Rustv-2” or the
“5th channel”. In addition, we had studied the Georgian way of doing
things carefully that we even separated a certain group of people who
were assigned to invade the “Hanrapetutyun” (Republic) political
party’s office and take all they have (later on, this was considered as
a huge blow to the opposition as a whole).
Armenia lacked other attributes for a revolution-in particular, the
opposition was not able to find a Nino Burjanadze or a Yulya Timoshenko
(singer Hamazasp could not substitute for them). The contemporary
Armenian artists were out of sight. They only sing for cash money and
almost always “balanced” by strong structures. The Armenian opposition
could not even come up with its emblem-a rose or lily. That, I assure
the reader, was extremely important.
In a word, the Armenian revolution did not take shape. As a result, the
authorities did a revolution on Baghramian street. In addition, it is
important to understand that the revolution did not take place not
because of the “Kolsto” (ring) operation, but rather it was the
opposite: the “Koltso”(ring) operation worked because there was no
revolution. It seems as though it worked out for Ukraine.