Tweet
TER-PETROSYAN PSYCHOLOGICALLY NOT READY TO RETURN
Harutyun Gevorgyan
Hayots Ashkharh Daily
Oct 30 2007
Armenia
Interview with MP, deputy-Chair of the Republican Party Razmik
Zohrabyan
"Mr. Zohrabyan how would you evaluate Levon Ter-Petrosyan's
"demonstration-speech". With what play-cards does he intend to start
his political game?"
"October 26 speech was the extended version of September 21 speech,
with certain specific emphasis. All the accusations included in
this public speech can be addressed to them. Levon Ter-Petrosyan's
political, economic, ideological, and moral accusations once used to
be addressed to his administration. Today the leader of the former
administration blames the government in power for the same things,
trying to change the addressee or pointing at a new target.
Going ahead of the term of official nomination, he already announced
about his nomination for presidency. This rush, in my view, has
nothing to do with the main election process. We came to know that
the members of his team were quite unaware of his self-nomination
and it was a surprise for those who were with him on the platform.
This circumstance, in its turn, testifies to the fact that Levon
Ter-Petrosyan usually comes to personal decisions. This means there
is a lack of team in the newly formed opposition camp as well. They
can't speak about common programs or goals. Even on Friday I noticed
essential contradictions in that pole."
" Do you agree to the assessments, that the former President made
impermissible announcements, from which our enemies can easily
benefit?"
"There were various emphases in the speech regarding the vulnerable
aspects of our state. To reveal the weak points of your country to
the foreign world is not proper to the person who used to head the
country. The attempts to speculate similar phenomenon are also not
justified, because our state has only 16 years' history. By the way
the reforms of the second generation are aimed at fillings those gaps.
I wouldn't say that they have disclosed a state secret, but the first
public speech causes concerns, because it included such tendencies. And
we all know that Levon Ter-Petrosyan knows important state secrets.
In internal political campaign, to address similar announcements
and speculations to the foreign audience cannot be justified. In
general the political opposition that desires to see the country's
progress and development must elaborate its tactics and strategy from
constructive positions."
" The honor of the first President presumes weighty responsibility. Can
you justify his calling the government in power "chieftains", when both
the state and the government system have been formed under his rule?"
" Such characteristic given to the government proves that Levon
Ter-Petrosyan is psychologically not ready to return to the political
domain and take the power. Instead he gives a scream of a weak and
causes offense to the authorities. There were scoundrels in his
administration, but I would abstain from remembering the years when
he was in power.
I accept that a big part of economy is in shadow at present, but
the state and the authorities never hinder the activity of any
entrepreneur. On the contrary they persuade them to transfer their
activity into the legal field. But during his power they used to
threaten by gun all those who were not with them.
If this new movement really desires to come to power through
democratic methods, through elections, then why didn't they run
for the parliamentary elections with this team? Why did Levon
Ter-Petrosyan make his mind to start his political game on the
threshold of the presidential elections? In what way is he going to
change the government that has gained the majority of the votes, some
months back, when the political developments are still in process,
when no turning point has occurred and people can't abruptly change
their position? Public opinion is usually formed during years and it
changes only and only in case of the existence of weighty factors.
They ignored the people and they didn't event try to clarify
the attitude of the voters towards them during the parliamentary
elections. Why should they vote for them now?"
Harutyun Gevorgyan
Hayots Ashkharh Daily
Oct 30 2007
Armenia
Interview with MP, deputy-Chair of the Republican Party Razmik
Zohrabyan
"Mr. Zohrabyan how would you evaluate Levon Ter-Petrosyan's
"demonstration-speech". With what play-cards does he intend to start
his political game?"
"October 26 speech was the extended version of September 21 speech,
with certain specific emphasis. All the accusations included in
this public speech can be addressed to them. Levon Ter-Petrosyan's
political, economic, ideological, and moral accusations once used to
be addressed to his administration. Today the leader of the former
administration blames the government in power for the same things,
trying to change the addressee or pointing at a new target.
Going ahead of the term of official nomination, he already announced
about his nomination for presidency. This rush, in my view, has
nothing to do with the main election process. We came to know that
the members of his team were quite unaware of his self-nomination
and it was a surprise for those who were with him on the platform.
This circumstance, in its turn, testifies to the fact that Levon
Ter-Petrosyan usually comes to personal decisions. This means there
is a lack of team in the newly formed opposition camp as well. They
can't speak about common programs or goals. Even on Friday I noticed
essential contradictions in that pole."
" Do you agree to the assessments, that the former President made
impermissible announcements, from which our enemies can easily
benefit?"
"There were various emphases in the speech regarding the vulnerable
aspects of our state. To reveal the weak points of your country to
the foreign world is not proper to the person who used to head the
country. The attempts to speculate similar phenomenon are also not
justified, because our state has only 16 years' history. By the way
the reforms of the second generation are aimed at fillings those gaps.
I wouldn't say that they have disclosed a state secret, but the first
public speech causes concerns, because it included such tendencies. And
we all know that Levon Ter-Petrosyan knows important state secrets.
In internal political campaign, to address similar announcements
and speculations to the foreign audience cannot be justified. In
general the political opposition that desires to see the country's
progress and development must elaborate its tactics and strategy from
constructive positions."
" The honor of the first President presumes weighty responsibility. Can
you justify his calling the government in power "chieftains", when both
the state and the government system have been formed under his rule?"
" Such characteristic given to the government proves that Levon
Ter-Petrosyan is psychologically not ready to return to the political
domain and take the power. Instead he gives a scream of a weak and
causes offense to the authorities. There were scoundrels in his
administration, but I would abstain from remembering the years when
he was in power.
I accept that a big part of economy is in shadow at present, but
the state and the authorities never hinder the activity of any
entrepreneur. On the contrary they persuade them to transfer their
activity into the legal field. But during his power they used to
threaten by gun all those who were not with them.
If this new movement really desires to come to power through
democratic methods, through elections, then why didn't they run
for the parliamentary elections with this team? Why did Levon
Ter-Petrosyan make his mind to start his political game on the
threshold of the presidential elections? In what way is he going to
change the government that has gained the majority of the votes, some
months back, when the political developments are still in process,
when no turning point has occurred and people can't abruptly change
their position? Public opinion is usually formed during years and it
changes only and only in case of the existence of weighty factors.
They ignored the people and they didn't event try to clarify
the attitude of the voters towards them during the parliamentary
elections. Why should they vote for them now?"