The political developments preceding the presidential elections in Armenia, at least in terms of the behavior of the main political subjects, gradually went beyond the influence of internal issues and appeared within the influence of fight of great powers for Armenia.
But, even in this case, home issues are still the basis of key importance for political developments which are in the field of external influence.
The great powers have to take into account the Armenian reality the key issue of which is the social and psychological situation and its aftermaths emigration, social apathy, depression, lack of confidence, disappointment with almost all the members of the political system.
In order to overcome this situation, Armenia needs immense financial investments. The West will prepare the necessary ground, i.e. an active and modern society, for the long-term partnership with Armenia only with the help of these investments.
In this context, though, it is surprising that the conference of donors for Armenia has been postponed which would provide investments of at least several millions. While Russia benefits from the lack of investments and the resulting hard social-psychological situation and social apathy.
So why has the West delayed the conference? The point is that the West will give money to Armenia only if it is sure that it will be spent on reforms and withdrawal of Armenia from under the Russian destructive supremacy. Meanwhile, there are no precedents in Armenia for such future, or the history is not worth investments of several millions or billions.
Perhaps this is the reason why the West in crisis avoids investing a lot of money in Armenia if they may serve Russia.
It is not accidental that in parallel with the statement on the delay of the conference of donors the EU high ranking officials reminded Serzh Sargsyan about the necessity of reforms and corruption fight. In other words, Serzh Sargsyan was reminded that Armenia cannot expect big money from the West unless the issue of power is pending and is divided into several points because the West does not want to throw its money away.
The issue of power in Armenia is so open that a small wind could blow all the money away.
Serzh Sargsyan is unable to resolve this issue. He is only able to make sure no other force, in particular the PAP and Robert Kocharyan, solve that issue. They are currently the main rivals of Serzh Sargsyan.
Sargsyan has resolved the issue of the Armenian National Congress, though Robert Kocharyan and Prosperous Armenia are trying intensively to restore the political influence of the Congress, at the same time keeping it under control in order to be more influential against Serzh Sargsyan.
In this governmental fight, Serzh Sargsyan will have to think on systemic changes not because the West demands it, which supports Serzh Sargsyan’s de jure presidency but also because it is time to demand systemic changes since the existing system has exhausted itself in terms of resources.
These changes presuppose shortened rights of the criminal-oligarchic regime, at least in terms of individuals. But this means that those who are not affected may join supporters of Robert Kocharyan and PAP. Serzh Sargsyan should worry about it, which is reflected in the process of elimination of individual members of the oligarchic system.
This makes the issue of power tough to solve and the loop is tightening around neck of the state.
The solution seems to be the following: either everyone leaves the solution of the power issue up to the new generation, or everyone decides to review their acts and to get out of this vicious circle. But, judging by the quality of the political system of Armenia and its traditions and stereotypes, the second option is impossible. With the same thinking, outlook, psychology and values, the first option is also almost impossible.
Apparently, the most possible is the third option – the decision of the young generation to boost participation in the process of governance and its dynamics. It already exists and it occurs in the form of different initiatives. But time requires broadening and intensification of these activities.
Implementation of power does not mean coming to power. Here, there is a delicate instinctive limit which defines decisions and actions because the citizen of Armenia has no issue of coming to power in accordance with the Constitution because it already belongs to the citizen, and second, the young generation has power a priori. The concept of youth, if psychologically healthy and complete, is a synonym to power, it is just necessary to make it effective.
Comments