The activities of the radical opposition before and after the presidential election deserved various responses and actions on part of the official campaign and the government. The government has been saying such phrases as avengers, adventurers and people, who have become a tool for others, confused ones, zombies, and recently even national fascists. This is perhaps the small part of such qualifications but it also expresses the political and expert-level dynamics about the movement. It is perhaps a separate topic of discussion whether these qualifications served the goal and brought the necessary results for the government. It’s hard to know whether this situation served the adequate goal. But it was more than predictable that the following situation and its analysis at the political and expert level would bring to the opinion that it was an attempt of a color revolution, was undoubted. Most probably, the momentum was created after Serzh Sargsyan’s visit to Moscow, after which the newly elected President of Armenia revealed a quite sound fact. In the beginning of the meeting with Vladimir Putin he publicly announced that the government of Russia has been supporting his candidacy at different stages of the campaign and even after elections and that this support has never been so obvious in past. Despite the fact that this statement of Sargsyan originated a loud noise in Armenia it would still be naïve to assume that this statement was made spontaneously and that it wasn’t possibly agreed with the Russian government in advance. Thus, on one hand the governmental elite of Russia and Armenia input certain clarity in Moscow about the role of the Russian government in the formation of the Russian government. In the meantime the new President of Armenia made it clear to other interested parties what geopolitical sources he was going to use to withstand the foreign pressure. It is not an accident that that the parties, which recently entered the governmental coalition, gave their consent to this course. Having done that they made their statements, according to which the processes in Armenia were an attempt of color revolution. First this statement was made by the spokesman of the Republican Party Edward Sharmazanov. ARF Bureau member Hrant Margaryan’s statement followed Sharmazanov’s. He claimed that there was a simple, wish, by which, “the foreign forces were trying to organize a revolution in Armenia through Levon Ter-Petrosyan.” According to him, all they did is debilitated the status of this country and put in a miserable state. “And a miserable and weak state is a great ground for foreign forces to destabilize it,” Margaryan said. It is noteworthy that almost on the same days the incumbent president at the time Robert Kocharyan, who spoke not only about the existence of the “foreign clients” of the developments in Armenia but also added that there are people in Armenia, who are willing to offer those services to outside forces. Moreover, in one of his TV interviews warned the people, “This is not your game.” And as it’s known the copyright of color revolutions belongs to the west (UK or USA) or more accurately to say to the influential US financial circles Serzh Sargsyan’s statement came to clarify that Russia is showing an obvious support to the Armenian government and showed his discontent of the attempts of the west to organize evolution. It came to show the image of the friend and the foe. Many analysts and especially Russian ones have been saying that there were certain elements of western color revolution technologies used in Armenia. And it is quite simple and understandable on one hand the cautious behavior of the radical opposition and on the other hand the quite loyal attitude of the Armenian government to the theme of color revolutions. The radical opposition was trying to keep itself away from the realistic accusations of being connected with the foreign mediation and interference. It is no surprise that Levon Ter-Petrosyan has been constantly denying through the media and even during his interview to Russian sources all the rumors regarding his plans to organize a revolution after the elections and was claming that he was going to reach the power only through peaceful and legal methods. As of the government they not only didn’t have any political or geopolitical resources to compete with the west but also tried to show the protesters that the attempt of Ter-Petrosyan to organize a color revolution in Armenia would bring our country to the bad state emerged in post-revolutionary Ukraine and Georgia. Besides that it would be an extra PR against the activities and intentions of the opposition. Nevertheless, the topic of the color technologies is going to become one of the top top themes of analysts and political circles. There will be many debates and discussions around that. Indeed, it is not very hard to see similarities of the Armenian “movement” with the color revolutions in Ukraine, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan and a bit earlier in Serbia. At any rate, the color revolution is a clearly developed and applied political technology, where there are no nuances and instead everyone is player and knows his/her role. They all clearly knew how to “maneuver”. In all the color revolutions there were a series of important factors. One of the most important factors is the elections in all the countries were only a decent “stage” to launch those technologies. Furthermore, the actual results of elections usually do not become an obstacle for color revolutions. For example during the orange revolution in Ukraine Victor Yushchenko’s team initially was claiming that they will recognize the results of elections only if their candidate wins. And the engine of the orange revolution Yulia Timoshenko even during the first round of the Ukrainian presidential elections stated the following, “We are consistently preparing to organize a rebellion after the publication of the official results of elections.” The consistent actions should have been preceded with the brainwash of the electorate and their separation into “slaves” and government elite… It is not surprising that during the campaign the voters were constantly inculcated with the idea that there is no way that Yushchenko will lose but if the official results of the elections show the opposite it will mean that the elections were falsified and indeed the people should come out on the streets to stop the “outlaw”. The ones, who have seen orange tints in the Armenian processes probably, have noticed familiar “motives” similar to the ones applied by the radical position in Ukraine. The tactics of the radical groups was quite similar to the western technologies of color revolutions. A similarity can be noticed between the youth groups of the Yugoslavian Otpor, Georgian Kmara, Ukrainian Pora and the Armenian Sksvela. Specifically, in almost all the mentioned countries it was the youth that was playing an active role in the processes. They were engaged in all the events. By the way, they were the main residents on the “tents”. It is considered that the color revolutions are real holidays for young people and it is not an accident that the authors of color revolutions accompany their activities with concerts, music and entertainment, carnivals and shows… Of course, the number of coincidence is not over with the above-mentioned. However, the most common and fundamental similarity, which always exists during color revolutions regardless of their type – rose, orange, tulip, dance and music, is that they all rely on actual contradictions formed in the society. No doubt that is the contractions between the average citizens and the corrupt and criminalized governments. And if at some point the government doesn’t succeed in solving these issues the opposition on its own or with the support of geopolitical interest groups uses effective technologies by using the anger factor of the society. And the color revolution is just a successful example of such technologies and nothing more…
