After the parliamentary elections and Tigran Sargsyan’s appointment as prime minister, the IMF announced a 500 million loan to Armenia, and the World Bank a 200 million loan. Besides, all these major financial organizations approved the economic policy of the prime minister though they notice some flaws. But loans are issued with the hope that the flaws will be attended to.
All the oppositional parties of Armenia criticized the program of Tigran Sargsyan’s government, blamed him for 14% economic decline. The point is that the parties which were formerly conflicting have now united.
The government’s program could have been more credible and substantiated, of course. It could have been better but looking from the other side it will look like as if all the four opposition forces have appeared on the other side of the barricade with the international financial institutes. And if we take into account that these institutions, IMF and WB, finance the Western policy, we should note that the pro-Western Heritage and other forces of Armenia are acting against the pro-West policy of the ruling party.
This is a conditional division. Nevertheless, those who intend to have their own candidate for president should realize that they will compete with not only the entire administrative machine headed by Serzh Sargsyan but also the financial policy of the West. In the end, it is not a secret that almost half of the amount of pensions and benefits of Armenia are paid from IMF loans which goes directly to the budget. Imagine what will happen if the IMF suddenly demands back the debt and does not issue the next tranche. Hardly anyone doubts that the IMF and others pursue their own goals in Armenia.
Do the alternative and opposition parties think on this situation? What can they propose instead and why haven’t they done it yet? Will the Heritage appear in the “anti-West” camp?
Actually, foreign debt is becoming an almost decisive factor in Armenia. “Thanks” to it Serzh Sargsyan despite pressure did not dismiss Tigran Sargsyan and announced himself a pro-West leader. What else does Armenia have? It is already in debt. Only Tigran Sargsyan seems to “enjoy” this who ensured guarantees of keeping office.
In this case, it is not so important which path should be chosen by Armenia, a pro-West or pro-Russian. It is not even important which of these ways is more progressive because by and large we are found to have no choice due to foreign debt. Just as Serzh Sargsyan does not have any choice. And we are drifting to the West not because it is closer to our civilization but because of someone's fault who pushed us into a huge debt.
What is done with the countries that have large debts? We see the example of Greece and many other countries. At some point they are forced to privatize all national property, and when they resist, they tear off their skin.
The opposition should request clarification from the prime minister and president why the “light” version of the debt was chosen instead of developing the economy. Such claims have already been heard but for now debts are treated as “shortcoming” of Tigran Sargsyan but, in fact, Sargsyan is the “product” of the external debt bondage.
Of course, it's too late to do something because the money has been borrowed and spent but if an open public debate is launched on this account, including in Parliament, you can try to determine the level of impact of this factor in the choice of RA and may neutralize it.
Comments