PAP’s Back to USSR, How About Others?
HAKOB BADALYAN
Story from Lragir.am News:
Published: 16:08:09 – 28/04/2012
In Tsaghkadzor, the international conference on the role of NGOs in
forming the Eurasian Union is held in the hotel owned by the PAP
leader Gagik Tsarukyan which has been initiated by the union of
Armenian-Russian NGOs. The leader of this union of the PAP leader. It
was announced that Putin’s message will be published during the
conference.
No doubt the conference will be used for the PAP campaign. It goes
without saying. After all, everyone wants to make their campaign more
impressive, and Tsarukyan will try to convey that Russia backs him. In
terms of sovereignty this is unacceptable but for the Armenian
political field it is not a surprise.
There is another essential point – the issue of the Eurasian Union.
Its godfather Putin has never hidden his vision of this Union as a
modern model of the Soviet Union. One can imagine what could be modern
for Putin judging by the current society in Russia. In Putin’s
totalitarian `sovereign democracy’ one is as free as Putin wants, and
those who want to be more free appear in prison, exile or the border
of their freedom is drawn by OMON from time to time.
Hence, the Prosperous Armenia Party and its conference express their
position on restoring the USSR which stands for Putin’s plan of loss
of sovereignty of Armenia. In fact, PAP supports this plan.
It is interesting to know Vartan Oskanian’s attitude who acts against
political monopoly and for political and economic modernization.
Oskanian is a skilled diplomat and knows what the Eurasian Union is
and what the ultimate product created by Putin with his 12 years of
political monopoly and Nazarbayev with his 20 years of monopoly in
Kazakhstan claiming the status of father of the Eurasian Union with
Putin can be.
Can Vartan Oskanian imagine that the Eurasian Union will be a more
modern and democratic structure guaranteeing the freedom of
individuals and the country than Russia and Kazakhstan?
Or is this a pre-election reverence to Russia and after the elections
the PAP will adopt a more pragmatic political stance in line with the
economic and political challenges facing Armenia?
Although it is not ruled out that PAP and Vartan Oskanian do not share
opinions. Nevertheless, the situation is too serious for this duality
and most probably there is no disagreement and there is a skillfully
drafted pre-election strategy.
In the pre-election period the Republicans also played the Russian
game promoting interviews of Tigran Sargsyan with his pro-West image
with Russian mass media in which he was trying to assure that Moscow
is the primary ally to Armenia. At the same time, Tigran Sargsyan
focused on the economic aspect of the Eurasian Union and noted that it
is not expedient for Armenia to enter this union without a common
border with it.
In fact, official Yerevan speaks about it cautiously, knowing that the
European Union will dislike it with which the negotiations on FTA and
visa facilitation have been launched. The European Union conveys to
Yerevan that the EU and the Eurasian Union are incompatible and
mutually exclusive.
At the same time, Serzh Sargsyan is trying to insure himself and took
Artashes Geghamyan on the Republican ticket who has absolute support
for the Eurasian Union. It is possible that Sargsyan tried to balance
the situation and by encouraging the relationship with the EU through
practical and pragmatic policy he uses Geghamyan’s fiery speeches for
their moral effect on Russia, as well as the possible PAP advantage
regarding this issue.
Everything is clear about the other forces running for parliament. The
bloc of the Heritage and the Free Democrats is the only force which
brings up the necessity to leave the Soviet and Russian system and
seek for development in the western civilization.
In this regard, the Armenian National Congress has not expressed a
clear stance. Instead, it makes clear hints to Russia. Namely, the
Congress often criticizes the Western institutions for insufficient
rigidness and consistency in dealing with Armenia. Instead, it makes
loyal pronouncements addressed to Russia. For instance, ahead of
Putin’s election Lyudmila Sargsyan, the leader of one of the parties
of the Congress, called on the Armenians to vote for Putin. The
Congress did not criticize her behavior, noting that it was not the
official stance of the Congress. Later in April 20 rally Levon
Ter-Petrosyan brought the example of Russian Duma with its pocket
opposition to illustrate the behavior of the Congress in the next
parliament rather than any other country with developed
parliamentarian culture and tradition.
At the same time, there is an obvious disagreement between the
Republic Party and the rest of the Congress. The leader of this party
Aram Sargsyan openly supports the pro-West political and civil
development. By the way, he is in Brussels and takes almost no part in
the campaign of the Congress.
The stance of the ARF Dashnaktsutyun is more uncertain. It seems that
this party should have a pro-West stance because a significant part of
the history of the ARF-D was located in the Western civilization. At
the same time, the ARF leaders were said at different times to have
cooperated with the Soviet and Bolshevist system and the Soviet KGB.
The present ARF-D is different from the former ARF-D. The present one
first of all differs by its personal pragmatism rather than party
pragmatism. Accordingly, most ARF leaders have received business
quotas. And it means that if they do determine the political position
of the ARF-D, then the starting point is mercantile interest. For its
part, it means that the ARF-D will officially follow a society where
its capital will be more secure and profitable. And since the
situation is highly relative, the ARF takes its time and keeps
relative uncertainty.
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments25983.html