By Susanna Petrosyan, Yerevan. Exclusively for Vestnik Kavkaza
The political life of Armenia has come close to the stage of anagnorisis. Leaders of Prosperous Armenia (BHK), Armenian National Congress (HAC), Dashnaktsutyun (ARF) and Heritage are discussing a shift of government. They view the economic course of the government as pressurization of small and medium business, enforcement of monopolies and spontaneous tax policy where some businessmen pay taxes while others do not.
The non-coalition forces have been expressing their distrust of the Cabinet for two years. They voted against governmental programs and bill on budget in 2012-2013. Opposition has not backed the government after the 2012 parliamentary polls and the 2013 presidential polls. The distrust became especially critical during the December discussions of the accumulative pension system adopted on January 1 and the government’s fraud around debts for Russian gas.
The opposition quartet has the package and stage-by-stage approach to the switch of power in the country. The package version implies resignation of President Serzh Sargsyan and dissolution of the government, as proposed by the HAC. BHK, ARF and Heritage demand resignation of the government and then presidential and parliamentary polls.
Levon Ter-Petrosyan, leader of HAC and ex-President of Armenia, expressed approval of the stage-by-stage plan: “It is no secret that HAC, as before, wants full shift of power, that is snap presidential and parliamentary elections. It realizes that the goal cannot be achieved alone because it would need support from other political forces. The later seem to be more inclined towards the stage-by-stage variant. Having a positive evaluation of changes undergoing in the context of pressure from social and political forces, HAC considers the version acceptable and shows readiness to do all it can to achieve dissolution of the government together with all the other forces.
Ter-Petrosyan’s words about the role of BHK leader, major businessman and benefactor Gagik Tsarukyan, in political processes stirred up the public. Some groups in the government see the need for radical changes. Large businessmen may also play a decisive role in the power shift, as it happened in Georgia and Ukraine. “How is Tsarukyan worse than Ivanishvili who, with the help of Saakashvili’s wisdom, managed to shift the power peacefully? Or Rinat Ahmetov and Sergey Tigipko who let Yanukovych impose the state of emergency in Kiev?” asks Ter-Petrosyan.
Considering the human, information and financial resources of BHK, 35 members of parliament, the parallel between Tsarukyan and Ivanishvili, who played a huge role in altering the political course of Georgia, looks correct in many aspects. The difference is that Ivanishvili made most of his capital abroad while the BHK leader owns most of his business in Armenia. Besides, Ivanishvili organized a bloc named Georgian Dream. Armenia has an active group of four parties. Each party has a special role: BHK is the most resourceful, HAC has big political experience, ARF has good contacts with the Diaspora.
