There is a process of forming new parties in Armenia, the creation of which is timed for the upcoming parliamentary elections, to be held in April 2017. In the course of the past year four new parties have been created: 'Alliance', 'Civil Agreement', 'Bright Armenia' and 'Armenian Renaissance'. Observers believe that establishment of three of them is associated with the leading foreign players – Russia and the United States. Observers believe that "AB", which replaced the 'Country of Law' party, became the Russian project, and 'Civil Agreement' and 'Bright Armenia' have a pro-Western orientation.
According to the expert Arman Gevorgyan, the formation of new parties may indicate that the authorities are once again trying to organize a front of opposition to the real opposition as manifested by the 'Armenian National Congress' party (ANC) under the flag of pro-Western or pro-Russian opposition parties. The role of new political forces may consist of attracting the votes of the opposition electorate from the ANC.
This method has been used by the authorities several times. For example, the role of spoiler in the presidential elections of 2003 was played by the leader of the 'National Unity' party, Artashes Geghamyan, who took a portion of votes from the then-leader of the united opposition, Stepan Demirchyan. A similar role in the 2008 presidential election was successfully played by the leader of the 'Country of Law' party, Artur Baghdasaryan, who took a portion of votes from the leader of the united opposition, the first president Levon Ter-Petrosyan.
In conditions when most of the media are controlled by the authorities, and sessions of the parliament, for some reason, are not broadcast on the radio or on television, we can't exclude the fact that the new parties may take a portion of votes of the opposition electorate from the ANC.
A key role here is played by the active participation of the-then Foreign Minister Oskanyan in the informational support of illegal actions of the authorities on March 1st 2008. He tried to justify the actions of the authorities and assure the foreign media and diplomats that the opposition should be blamed for the tragic events. His statement about the fact that protesters were armed, which, despite all the efforts of the repressive machine, was not confirmed, caused disappointment in society. Oskanyan also tried to refute the fact that the authorities kept Ter-Petrosyan under house arrest.
The post-election events of March 1st, which are still not investigated, continue to haunt the Armenian society. Those events became the main topic for assessments and comments related to the creation of a new party. Now Oskanyan claims that the issue of the investigation of the March 1st events is on the agenda of his party. He admitted: "Then the authority is responsible for that day. I was a part of that authority."
While still a deputy of the parliament from the PAP, Oskanyan twice voted for the proposal of the ANC faction to create a commission on the investigation into the activities of the law enforcement agencies, related to the events of March 1st. However, this is not enough to become a real player, an unmanipulated political figure, in the political field.
"The intrigue of creation of a party is associated with Kocharyan. Until Oskanyan will give a political assessment of what happened on March 1st, he will be treated as a representative of Kocharyan in the political field," political columnist of the Lragir.am publication, Hakob Badalyan, thinks. The position taken by Oskanyan at the time, and the fact that during the events of March 1st, or during the following 8 years, he did not take steps on a real distancing from the "major character" of the March 1st tragedy, has created obstacles for his further political activity.
The situation for Oskanyan is also complicated by the fact that, while still being the second person in the PAP, after the first steps of the authorities on defeating this party he immediately left it. This gave reason to believe that Oskanyan left the PAP to take part in another project of Kocharyan. Recall that the PAP was originally created as political support for Kocharyan, who, after the end of his presidential term, planned to take the post of prime minister. He could not do it, therefore, analysts call the PAP a failed project of Kocharyan.
Considering the importance of the March 1st events for Armenian society and the very low popularity of Kocharyan, it can be assumed that the project on the creation of a new party will not succeed either. Today, on one side of the scales, there is the enviable energy of the former president, his active attempts to strengthen his political positions, his financial resources. On the other hand, there is the dispersal of the peaceful protests of March 1st, unprecedented in its cruelty, as a result of which 10 people died and more than 200 people were injured. Neither the US nor Russia, based on their own political expediency, want the return of Kocharyan to public politics. At the same time, they must consider the factor of the negative attitude of society to the second president. Thus, the "new circle of Kocharyan" may stop at the events of March 1st 2008.
