– What would you say about the political achievements and failures of the past year? What have been the changes made by the government in politics and what is the situation in the result?
– It is a crisis situation that is not new but now is more evident. The situation in Armenia is very interesting now. All parties without exception are saying that it is impossible to hold fair elections in the country. All parties are speaking of participation in elections in such conditions. The question is that is the role of political parties if the main mechanism of political life, which is the institute of elections, does not work in Armenia. Political parties are institutes and have certain roles established by the Constitution, thus they have to work out certain projects for development of the country and implement them. They have to fight for tools through elections, and as soon as they have those tools, they have to use them to make their projects come true. Currently the main condition of political life, which is the free elections institute, does not work.
– The authorities claim all the time that these elections are going to be the most transparent and fair elections of the past twenty years.
– It is twenty years that they give this promise. Parties are active now and this is where the political rival starts from. Each of them has a certain goal but those goals are not the ones that are based on their mission or activities they are supposed to do. What are those parties doing if all of them believe that it is impossible to hold free elections? This is the reason of political crisis. They are speaking of a lot of options such as mobilization of people and other tools. I think that all of the parties have a problem, which is that they should create certain conditions in order to make certain relations with the incumbent administration. We should ask a question if these processes that are happening are in some way connected with the interests of the society. What is the goal if the society is involved in such processes? There is one goal, which is using the society for the purpose of creating certain conditions they need. And it doesn’t matter who is sitting in the parliament and what their relation is with state interests.
– What would you say about the past activities of the incumbent government and what achievements and failures they have before the elections?
– The administration has secured themselves during these four years from direct clash with any parties by talking to different powers, including the West and others. The only thing they needed was escaping from direct clash. Non- legitimacy is still the same. They are simply doing replacements by firing people and appointing others, which does not change anything in fact. The goal is creation of an environment, where they will escape from direct clash.
– Do you mean that they have made their positions stronger?
– They have no problem with making their positions stronger. They are pretty strong and are firmly sitting in their seats and their shields are the police and oligarchs. The only thing has changed is that the situation is not that severe now.
– Due to what were the authorities able to get this quiet environment?
– I think they simply evaluated the environment with political parties well.
– You are saying that parties are doing their best to develop certain relations with the incumbent administration. Is it a political trade going on?
– Usually political powers cut deals concerning sectors, political, economic dividends and separation of power. When we speak of criminal and oligarchic system, it means that the power is taken and divided between these people. They divide everything. When parties take part in that process, in fact they legitimize that process and power. They enlarge the scope of their activities and become the basement of that criminal and oligarchic system. In fact after the incumbent power the parties have become the second factor disorienting the society. They are saying one thing but doing another thing. There is no sense to separate them as pro- government and opposition powers. All of them have the same qualities and methods. People say that Gagik Tsarukyan may become opposition power; he is one of those people in the same team and has mobilized a lot of people to protect this system. There is no difference. Only those powers can be different which may give up on this method of political struggle and deals. There are no such powers; even the new ones have the same methods. There may be change only if the society asks a question how long it can go on and what we should do to change the situation.
– What political achievements have there been in the opposition sector? What were the achievements of the ANC? This power enjoys the support of the large part of the society, a dialogue was to start with the government, and political prisoners were set free.
– They say that they are satisfied with the fact that the political prisoners have been set free and they have an opportunity to hold demonstrations. But I think the society benefited too because in 2008 this movement was a new wave in the society. They society has started to think differently rather than the ANC. It seems the ANC is sinking under the same wave it has generated. I think the society has already recognized all of them. They have discovered the faces of all political powers. The ANC’s leadership sees that the society has gone forward and they even give estimations to their power. If they change, they can be on the same page with the society, and if they fail to change themselves, they will sink under that wave. The Justice alliance was like this power. As soon as they turned not to be representing the interests of the society, they disappeared. A vacuum as originated. The same thing can happen now if they don’t change their policy. The demand of the society is very big now. Thus, the political powers have to give an answer for their failures if they have failed to do the demand of the society.
– The opposition representatives say that the reason they have failed to bring about change is the lack of the public support. It seems that the society does not want to fight for change and is going far from that point.
– What is the roadmap and plan the opposition offers to the society? Is that plan their offer to go home and return in two weeks? The society understands that they don’t have anything more to say and that the ANC does not meet their demand anymore.
– You said that new movements are coming up as people have opened their eyes. May the upcoming parliamentary elections be fair in this situation?
– If there is no electoral mechanism, whatever the society demands cannot happen. You can go to vote but they will announce something different after you go out. The experience of other countries shows that change is brought about when the society does not ask anyone what they should do. They started movements and in many places they even did not let parties approach. For example, in 80s the movement of Chile started by employees of the mining sector, which was brought to the finish.
– Isn’t this situation mature in our country? Doesn’t the society know what exactly it wants?
– I think that time is coming. The experience of the past twenty years has brought to a situation when people always rely on parties. They used to think that all is about parties, and that is why we are in this situation. Time comes when people understand that party members cannot bring about change because the only thing they want is power. It is important who the leader is. Movement leaders come out of the society. In all countries where changes succeeded there were revolutionists. System change is revolution. In Arabic countries people are the ones who make changes, and parties are around them.
– What forecasts do you have concerning Armenia?
– I think that by using new technologies the society is starting to think otherwise than parties. As a result the society will understand their mistake and will come to the conclusion that changes are not brought about by parties. After they understand this we may expect for change.
– What changes have there been in foreign policy? It seems that the issue of Karabakh is in deadlock following the meeting in Kazan.
– The co- chairmen of the Minsk Group say that the results in the bases of the negotiations do not bring to results, and that the principles of Madrid cannot solve the problem. I remember when there were hearings in the European parliament in summer, the European experts and Minsk Group co- chairmen said that Kazan would be the last point. If they fail to have improvement this time, maybe there will be need for changing the overall approach. Even the crisis group representatives said that the general approach had to be changed. They have not changed this approach. Many experts say that the EU has to be more active. Nothing has been done concerning these announcements but I see that the overall approach has not changed. Maybe even the parties do not hope for that and they just spend time. That is why the process was suspended. The same happened to the Armenian- Turkish relations. It ended up with a situation when they again had to ask the Diaspora to come and invest money. All the time they speak about money. That money maybe cannot even come here because there are attractive conditions for such investments. Changes are not taking place.