“Chorrord Ishkhanutyun” sees the only logical explanation to the Yerevan authorities’ rejection of the opposition bid for a public rally as follows: “Authorizing the June 20 rally would mean for the regime signing an act of surrender and allowing a few hundred thousand people to gather in the square and demand the resignation of the criminal regime.”
“Aravot” queries in its editorial: “Which is correct – to wish for Armenia to be stripped of its voting right in Strasbourg on June 23 or to do everything to prevent it?”
“There is no unequivocal answer to this question. If no sanctions are imposed on our country, it will mean that our government has managed to get away with it and convince the Europeans of our thriving democracy. And now let’s assume that sanctions are applied against Armenia on June 23. The country’s authorities will, of course, ‘deserve’ it. But it is obvious that they will not particularly suffer because of these sanctions – they will not be deprived either of their money, mansions or expensive SUVs,” the paper says.
“Taregir” writes: “We have a miserable intelligentsia, which is a sad reality rather than a word game or a political demarche. An Armenian intellectual is a person constantly ridiculed and disregarded by the ‘good guys’, a person abandoned by the people, a person always appeasing the authorities and begging alms like street people. Only a few of them managed to burst out of the straightjacket as they rebelled along with them people, got the thrashing and were clapped into jails. And the others are still making calculations as to who is better – Levon [Ter-Petrosian] or Serzh [Sarkisian]? The answer to this question for them is one: the incumbent is always better.
“Hayots Ashkhar” sees Armenia’s domestic political agenda as reduced to ‘consistently made and quickly turned down dialogue offers’: “An offer of a dialogue between the government and the opposition is made, discussions begin, some politicians and sections of the public show enthusiasm, others express cautious optimism, and eventually the so-called Popular Movement of Levon Ter-Petrosian issues a statement rejecting the offer.”
“Azg” writes: “After the presidential election, nearly the whole opposition electorate passed under the control of Levon Ter-Petrosian’s team. This is not liked by the Armenian authorities at all, since the 2007/2008 elections are not the last ones by any account and initiating the establishment of a public council will try to influence this circumstance as it is likely to recruit representatives of the “constructive opposition” whose highly critical statements made from the council’s tribune will surely be picked up by television stations and run for hours.”
“Haykakan Zhamanak” writes: “June 20 is an important but still just another stage of the struggle and approving or banning this rally in this sense has only a symbolic meaning, because the rally, as it was said, will take place in either case.”
(Armen Dulian)
“Aravot” queries in its editorial: “Which is correct – to wish for Armenia to be stripped of its voting right in Strasbourg on June 23 or to do everything to prevent it?”
“There is no unequivocal answer to this question. If no sanctions are imposed on our country, it will mean that our government has managed to get away with it and convince the Europeans of our thriving democracy. And now let’s assume that sanctions are applied against Armenia on June 23. The country’s authorities will, of course, ‘deserve’ it. But it is obvious that they will not particularly suffer because of these sanctions – they will not be deprived either of their money, mansions or expensive SUVs,” the paper says.
“Taregir” writes: “We have a miserable intelligentsia, which is a sad reality rather than a word game or a political demarche. An Armenian intellectual is a person constantly ridiculed and disregarded by the ‘good guys’, a person abandoned by the people, a person always appeasing the authorities and begging alms like street people. Only a few of them managed to burst out of the straightjacket as they rebelled along with them people, got the thrashing and were clapped into jails. And the others are still making calculations as to who is better – Levon [Ter-Petrosian] or Serzh [Sarkisian]? The answer to this question for them is one: the incumbent is always better.
“Hayots Ashkhar” sees Armenia’s domestic political agenda as reduced to ‘consistently made and quickly turned down dialogue offers’: “An offer of a dialogue between the government and the opposition is made, discussions begin, some politicians and sections of the public show enthusiasm, others express cautious optimism, and eventually the so-called Popular Movement of Levon Ter-Petrosian issues a statement rejecting the offer.”
“Azg” writes: “After the presidential election, nearly the whole opposition electorate passed under the control of Levon Ter-Petrosian’s team. This is not liked by the Armenian authorities at all, since the 2007/2008 elections are not the last ones by any account and initiating the establishment of a public council will try to influence this circumstance as it is likely to recruit representatives of the “constructive opposition” whose highly critical statements made from the council’s tribune will surely be picked up by television stations and run for hours.”
“Haykakan Zhamanak” writes: “June 20 is an important but still just another stage of the struggle and approving or banning this rally in this sense has only a symbolic meaning, because the rally, as it was said, will take place in either case.”
(Armen Dulian)