Tweet
WAS "ABSOLUTE MAJORITY" A COMPROMISE BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT AND THE WEST?
Hakob Badalyan
Lragir.am
09-07-2007 12:19:23
The foreign interviews with the Armenian prime minister Serge Sargsyan
are known for hidden surprises. For instance, the prime minister told
the foreign media that it is difficult to think about protection of
human rights when social issues have not been solved. Serge Sargsyan
gave another surprise in a recent interview with the foreign media. The
prime minister criticized NATO and the European Union. The Regnum
Agency reported that these organizations only speak about democracy,
meanwhile it is easier to speak than to act. Serge Sargsyan meant in
his interview with Reuters the Armenian and Turkish relation, namely
the tolerance of NATO and the European Union towards the blockade
of Armenia by Turkey. In this sense, Serge Sargsyan is right because
the centers of international politics have an even attitude towards
the absence of relation between Armenia and Turkey, whereas it is
evident that Turkey is tougher and harder on this issue than Armenia.
In this case, however, the tone of Yerevan regarding NATO and the
European Union is notable. No such critical statements had been
heard before.
Moreover, judging by the recent actions of official Armenia, a serious
talk with the West may be awaiting us. In particular, the president
of Armenia states that membership to NATO will reduce Armenia's
defense capacity.
This strange and to some extent unexpected statement was followed by
an equally strange and unclear bill which questions the broadcasting
of Radio Liberty in Armenia. If we add the reproachful tone of Serge
Sargsyan, it will appear that the Armenian politics is acquiring
an anti-West accent. It is not accidental that the meeting of the
president of the PACE with the Armenian president lasts for over
two hours.
Meanwhile, it appeared that Armenia would have no extraordinary
problems with the West after the West had unanimously welcomed
the parliamentary election of May 12. However, it should not be
excluded that the problem is the very welcome which certainly costs
a price. It is also probable that Armenia is reluctant to "pay" for
this welcome. Meanwhile, the outcome of the presidential election
was welcomed on this condition. On the condition that the quality
and contents of the post-electoral developments would offset the
shortcomings and drawbacks of the election and in the pre-election
period, which can be described with one word as fraudulent. In other
words, if the outcome of the election which led to an absolute majority
is considered acceptable, it is not because the West liked the slogan
and the color of ads of the Republican Party. The absolute majority is
the compromise between the government and the West. The West made a
compromise, whereas the Armenian government is now reluctant to make
it, therefore this anti-West moves are made. It should not be ruled
out, of course, that the West demands from the Armenian government
a compromise which jeopardizes to our national interests. In this
case, the government is right not to fulfill the condition. However,
in this case the problem is that the government had nevertheless made
this anti-national arrangement for the sake of absolute majority.
On the other hand, the Western condition is quite public: effective
government and promotion of democracy. The Armenian government seems
accepts this condition. However, the moves made to bring them into
being do not seem to match the outcome that the government had on May
12. In particular, with absolute majority, the Republican made hesitant
moves to form the government, and its final appearance hardly differed
from the development of the society. In this case, the question occurs
what the meaning of the absolute majority is. There is no need to be
surprised why this question occurs in the West, and if the Armenian
society is indifferent and therefore does not raise this issue,
considering that with both absolute and relative majority, there is
no hope for changing the government, the Western political centers
are not indifferent, because for them Armenia remains a country which
has potential importance in the region.
Hakob Badalyan
Lragir.am
09-07-2007 12:19:23
The foreign interviews with the Armenian prime minister Serge Sargsyan
are known for hidden surprises. For instance, the prime minister told
the foreign media that it is difficult to think about protection of
human rights when social issues have not been solved. Serge Sargsyan
gave another surprise in a recent interview with the foreign media. The
prime minister criticized NATO and the European Union. The Regnum
Agency reported that these organizations only speak about democracy,
meanwhile it is easier to speak than to act. Serge Sargsyan meant in
his interview with Reuters the Armenian and Turkish relation, namely
the tolerance of NATO and the European Union towards the blockade
of Armenia by Turkey. In this sense, Serge Sargsyan is right because
the centers of international politics have an even attitude towards
the absence of relation between Armenia and Turkey, whereas it is
evident that Turkey is tougher and harder on this issue than Armenia.
In this case, however, the tone of Yerevan regarding NATO and the
European Union is notable. No such critical statements had been
heard before.
Moreover, judging by the recent actions of official Armenia, a serious
talk with the West may be awaiting us. In particular, the president
of Armenia states that membership to NATO will reduce Armenia's
defense capacity.
This strange and to some extent unexpected statement was followed by
an equally strange and unclear bill which questions the broadcasting
of Radio Liberty in Armenia. If we add the reproachful tone of Serge
Sargsyan, it will appear that the Armenian politics is acquiring
an anti-West accent. It is not accidental that the meeting of the
president of the PACE with the Armenian president lasts for over
two hours.
Meanwhile, it appeared that Armenia would have no extraordinary
problems with the West after the West had unanimously welcomed
the parliamentary election of May 12. However, it should not be
excluded that the problem is the very welcome which certainly costs
a price. It is also probable that Armenia is reluctant to "pay" for
this welcome. Meanwhile, the outcome of the presidential election
was welcomed on this condition. On the condition that the quality
and contents of the post-electoral developments would offset the
shortcomings and drawbacks of the election and in the pre-election
period, which can be described with one word as fraudulent. In other
words, if the outcome of the election which led to an absolute majority
is considered acceptable, it is not because the West liked the slogan
and the color of ads of the Republican Party. The absolute majority is
the compromise between the government and the West. The West made a
compromise, whereas the Armenian government is now reluctant to make
it, therefore this anti-West moves are made. It should not be ruled
out, of course, that the West demands from the Armenian government
a compromise which jeopardizes to our national interests. In this
case, the government is right not to fulfill the condition. However,
in this case the problem is that the government had nevertheless made
this anti-national arrangement for the sake of absolute majority.
On the other hand, the Western condition is quite public: effective
government and promotion of democracy. The Armenian government seems
accepts this condition. However, the moves made to bring them into
being do not seem to match the outcome that the government had on May
12. In particular, with absolute majority, the Republican made hesitant
moves to form the government, and its final appearance hardly differed
from the development of the society. In this case, the question occurs
what the meaning of the absolute majority is. There is no need to be
surprised why this question occurs in the West, and if the Armenian
society is indifferent and therefore does not raise this issue,
considering that with both absolute and relative majority, there is
no hope for changing the government, the Western political centers
are not indifferent, because for them Armenia remains a country which
has potential importance in the region.