Said a pundit of the Armenian Center for National and International Studies Manvel Sargsyan during his interview to the news.am.
– How do you estimate the internal political situation in Armenia? What direction have the developments of the past year gone to and what outcome do we have?
– For the past two years the internal politics has been under the influence of the Armenian-Turkish process. And any kind of activation or reduction of political life was connected with this issue. The government succeeded in strangling the society with the Armenian-Turkish process. The ANC as a key opposition force has also connected itself to the Armenian-Turkish rapprochement process and the NKR conflict. And so for the past 1.5 years the opposition has been acting within this circle. On the one hand it is bringing up the thesis that as long as the NKR conflict is not resolved the Armenian-Turkish relations will not be regulated. On the other hand they were circulating theses, by which the government is confronting outside pressure and therefore they will have to make certain compromises regarding the NKR conflict. By that they were trying to justify the reason of their passiveness. They were brining the reason that it’s not right to complicate the state of the government so that they wouldn’t take extra compromises. And this as a matter of fact caused stagnation, which in its turn brought up debate in the opposition part of the society and even within the ANC. The reason of this debate is the theses brought up by the ANC. One side thinks that the approaches are weakening the movement, destroying the people’s movement and the other side claims the opposite. The fact that during these months, quite cruel things happened in Kyrgyzstan also conduced to the expansion of this conflict and debate and new theses were brought up. A question was originated to what extent the rebellion and revolution are the right things; parallels were drawn, which activated the political way of thinking because everybody thought that these insurgent movements are not acceptable for Armenia. Others were claming that the role of the opposition is pretty big in such processes. I have personally said several times that during difficult situations, when the people’s rights are oppressed, the role of the opposition is immense to deter the country from the revolution. I think it was due to the absence of normal opposition forces that caused the revolt in Kyrgyzstan. It means that instead of trying to deter the people from the revolution the opposition was doing the opposite and not always this brings positive results. Sometimes there are cases when the people make the decision.
– What are the developments within the ANM stipulated by? Why did those start now?
– The situation created within the ANM is not clear more many people. They tell the people that the environment has changed and they had to take certain steps. But this doesn’t enlighten people of what actually happened. I think that the change of the environment in any country is connected with the level of the members’ opinion about this or other step initiated by the party. If those are unacceptable and there are conflicts this environment will be created by all means. This is the reflection of the stagnant situation mentioned by me above. So environment cannot be changed if you have clear objectives. Such environment is created when there is no clear answer to questions.
– How will the developments within the ANM affect the ANM-ANC relationship if we take into account that the ANM is considered the intellectual ground of the ANC?
– Indeed, the ANM within the Congress is everything. This situation may create new figures within the leadership of the ANM. But this way or another, the people should express their attitude to the vector of the current policy. I haven’t seen any of the ANC members express opinions and provide clear direction regarding the processes occurring within the ANM. They may find reasons for the current situation, explain the developments but many members of the society claim that the opposition is too passive in terms of government change and the current regime. They claim that the struggle doesn’t exist. I personally think that these people are right and so this issue was taken out from the political arena by focusing on the Armenian-Turkish relations and the NKR conflict resolution. Many people don’t understand why this was done.
– Do you find the fragmentation of the ANM and the deflection from the Congress realistic?
– There is no fear for fragmentation. Only the leadership will be changed. There were never serious ideological controversies within the ANM. They have been brining up the same theses for the past 15-20 years. The problem is only connected with the current strategy of the ANC, whether they agree or not with that.
– How do you estimate the passive behavior of the opposition? Do you share the opinion that the society needs a new opposition, which will set new objectives and will be willing to solve those?
– The thing is that people wish to see a force, which will continue the line set by Levon Ter-Petrosyan in 2008. Many people think that the objective of change of government is out of the agenda. That is the why they are speaking of a new force. During various debates many people currently say that the philosophy of Ter-Petrosyan and his understanding and policy of the current Turkey-Armenia relations and the NKR make the people’s movement launched in 2008 suffer. It means they are accusing Ter-Petrosyan for not continuing the movement and struggle that he has launched. That’s why they say that as long as the wave hasn’t completely faded a new force is needed to guide the movement till its logical end. This issue is being broadly discussed in all kinds of social networks, meetings. So this is quite serious.
– Although recently the ARF announced that it demands change of government it continues to be more of an opposition to the ANC than the government. What role does it currently play in the political arena and what sit the current weight of the ARF?
– A certain situation is crated for the ARF regarding the Armenian-Turkish relations, which makes the ARF deflect from the coalition because this would affect its political principles and would endanger its further existence. And as due to the passiveness of the ANC the field was open the ARF has tried to occupy the role of the opposition. They are opposition only when it comes to a single issue, which makes their position very vague and mysterious. If you don’t have the objective of change of government, if you have the same approach with the government regarding the events of March 1 and are an opposition only in one issue – the Armenian-Turkish relations, no one can consider you a real opposition. That is the reason why this force hasn’t found its place yet. As much as I know they have certain bargaining within the federation as well. On the other hand, I think that the ARF correctly assesses its influence in the political life and it knows that even in the event of the change of regime and government it may have a little chance for victory. You may advocate for one issue and another force may win. This is the matter that makes the ARF stay neutral at the moment.
– Where will this take the ARF?
– This will take them nowhere. They will hang out like this quite a time. On the other hand, if the ANC continues its current approaches then a broader mass of people will appear in uncertainty and it’s quite possible that during the next elections this mass will split its votes between the Heritage and the ARF. And it’s quite natural that during the elections the ARF will act radical as well – they will remember the oligarchs and will receive their 5-7% due to that.
– Again the conversations about the conduct of extraordinary elections have been activated. What is this connected with? If the elections are not extraordinary what configuration can there be?
– A lot depends on how the opposition forces will behave because the behavior of the government hasn’t changed and will not change. The centered opposition that existed in 2008 cannot be said that can exist now. This field will be divided into sectors. It is another thing that the opposition will go through a qualitative mutation. The fight against the oligarchs is pretty difficult. It is not an authoritarian system just like the regime of Bakiyev or Shevardnadze in order to collapse it easily. This is an enrooted system starting from villages till the highest level. They have enslaved big masses of people. Such a rude strength doesn’t stop. In order to withstand them a new type of force is necessary, which can make this rude force to behave themselves both during elections and after. In the second half of the 20th century such changes took place in many countries. The forces, which came to power, would say, “you cannot play or joke with us,” and it was very difficult to communicate with those forces in a language of force. It has become very difficult for the government to shoot at these forces because they have found ways to make the government understand that they cannot be treated in an ill manner. They have convinced the oligarchic system to be alert. When they started to explain that they were not kidding the oligarchy started to negotiate with them. The oligarchs will never compromise or negotiate if they know that they won’t be punished. They gave up certain positions when they realize that they will lose it all if they don’t compromise.
– If it continues like this what picture will we have in the parliament? They say that the RPA has decided to form a sole government.
– If the oligarchy is unpunished it may even decide to take 101% of the votes. At the beginning they will write 130%, then they will drop it down to 100. As of the RPA and Prosperous Armenia competition it also fits to the logic of oligarchy. Oligarchy is defined as forces, clans divided into territories, for who the society is only a clan. That is the reason why they unite sometimes and fight against the society but they continue this struggle within. In Armenia everything is divided into territories and everybody is trying to set his control at least in his territory by trying to expand it. This logic is only changed when the society in an organized way makes they stop and revise their approaches. If there is no one to constrain them then the oligarchs will continue its total struggle till the end. For these people even 99% is failure.
– How do you estimate those many movements, which arose around the issues of the student’s park, foreign language schools, maintenance of the summer hall of Moscow cinema?
– It is true that within the society certain movements are organized, which bring up their approaches. Certain segments of the society are trying to demonstrate certain activism in regard of the resolution of concrete issues. These are merely new methods of civil struggle. This will create the force with new qualities, which will perhaps be able to withstand oligarchy. It is not even vital how the ANC considers these movements. They may endorse or may not but these movements are the results of the movement of 2008. And now we are witnessing the demonstration of that. It is very bad that the management of the Congress doesn’t use these movements for its upheaval and revision of its activity. It seems that the ANC remains in 2008 but the new situation requires new methods and solutions.