According to “Yerkir,” Levon Ter-Petrosian made clear on Friday that the main purpose of his round-the-clock demonstrations in Yerevan’s Liberty Square is to kick-start the frozen dialogue between the government and his Armenian National Congress (HAK). “Last spring, the Congress aimed to achieve a dialogue that would lead to pre-term elections in any case,” writes the paper. Now, it says, the HAK would settle for a “reasonable compromise” with the government.
“168 Zham” says the ruling coalition is putting the HAK in an awkward position by refusing to resume the dialogue before the Liberty Square protests are over. “The HAK is now faced with one very important challenge: how to send back home participants of its sit-in in a way that won’t be misunderstood?” writes the paper.
Gagik Minasian, a member of a delegation representing the coalition in talks with the HAK, tells “Hayots Ashkhar” that the two sides have pursued different goals in their dialogue. “It was proved during the dialogue that the HAK has no political, economic and legal grounds to put what it has said, promised and proposed into practice,” says Minasian. “At one point in the dialogue, the HAK leadership realized the absence of those grounds. That was the reason for the dialogue’s suspension. Having avoided a political defeat in that way, the HAK is now trying to achieve its goals by means of organizing a rampage involving the masses. All groups of our society must become conscious of this reality.”
“Zhamanak” comments on Prosperous Armenia Party (BHK) leader Gagik Tsarukian’s remark that former President Robert Kocharian has “the moral and political right” to return to the political arena. The paper says it “seems to be a blow to Serzh Sarkisian’s activities.” “The thing is that the morality of Kocharian’s comeback should have been measured by the effectiveness of his successor Serzh Sarkisian,” it explains, adding that Tsarukian implied that he is not satisfied with the current president’s track record and thinks that Kocharian’s return to government would be justified.
“Aravot” argues against such return, echoing Ter-Petrosian’s claims that Kocharian has never been a real politician. “[Kocharian] never had to persuade anyone in that his domestic and foreign policy programs are the right ones and that the ideology espoused by him will steer Armenia into the path of development,” editorializes the paper.