View from Moscow: There is no real alternative to Pashinyan in  Armenia

ArmInfo. Against the background of complete disunity and the inability of the opposition to unite efforts, we have to admit that there is no real political alternative to Nikol Pashinyan in Armenia. Chief Researcher of the IMEMO...

View from Moscow: There is no real alternative to Pashinyan in  Armenia
ArmInfo. Against the background of complete disunity and the inability of the opposition to unite efforts, we have to admit that there is no real political alternative to Nikol Pashinyan in Armenia. Chief Researcher of the IMEMO RAS, the President of the Scientific Society of Caucasian Studies Alexander  Krylov expressed a similar opinion to ArmInfo. "The Armenian Prime Minister distinguishes himself for his rather  tough methods of fighting his political opponents. It is important to  note that we are talking not only about the representatives of the"  former regime ", but also about his potential opponents. In my  opinion, Pashinyan's such policy, in spite of numerous forecasts  about his imminent failure, brings its dividends and success. During  his 2 years in power, of course, there were manifestations and  discontent. However, I do not notice signs of radical changes in  public sentiment, "he said. This state of affairs, according to  Krylov, testifies to the prime minister's success in resolving  socio-economic problems. At the same time, there is a slight decline  in Pashinyan's popularity in Armenian society. The latter in addition  to the coronavirus is explained by the slow pace of reforms and the  unmet public demand for their acceleration and radicalization. Against this background, the political scientist notes a radical  change in the power model in Armenia.  Pashinyan's coming to power  publicly instilled Armenian politics with publicity that it  previously seriously lacked. Before the "velvet" revolution,  decisions were made in offices, on the sidelines, anywhere, but not  in a public, open space. And according to Krylov, practically all the  main political figures were participants in the backstage processes.  Everyone who could not or did not want to play such games ended up  outside the political process. The political scientist compared the essence of such a model of power  to the game of chess so beloved by Serzh Sargsyan. With one "but" -  the former president simultaneously moved both white and black pieces  on the board. And such a "game" could continue for a long time, given  that it was conducted on condition of formal observance of the  Constitution. And the country even held elections, the outcome of  which, however, was initially shaped and determined by only one  person, not the people. "Thus, the change of power in Armenia from" chess "to public was the  result of many years of violation of the rule of law and democracy,  violation of the right of citizens to participate in governing the  country. The instrument of Pashinyan's arrival in Sargsyan's place  was the same mass protest of society. It is illegal in its form, but  in its essence returned to the Armenian people, the citizens of  Armenia the right and the opportunity to really participate in the  management of the state> the Russian political scientist concluded.