“Zhoghovurd” carries a commentary on the decision by several prominent Diaspora Armenians to monitor Armenia’s April 2017 parliamentary elections. “Should the Diaspora participate in Armenia’s political life?” writes the paper. “Armenia’s authorities have still not defined a clear answer to this question which has existed ever since the first days of our independence and maybe even longer. While [former President Levon] Ter-Petrosian tried hard to keep what he called ‘orange eaters’ away from Armenia’s political life, Robert Kocharian seemingly sought to open up the domestic political gates to the Diaspora, enabling traditional parties and other influential Diaspora organizations to get a foothold and expand in Armenia. But that was done on a moderate scale, and while they thought in the Diaspora that they could have an influence on Armenia’s government system the opposite happened over the years.”
“Zhamanak” comments on Prime Minister Karen Karapetian’s repeated warnings that the pre-election period in Armenia makes it harder for his government to improve the socioeconomic situation because potential investors are now more wary of doing business in the country. “In theory, he is certainly right,” writes the paper. “But in practice, the situation is completely different and for Karen Karapetian’s government the pre-election period is not a problem but an excuse.” It says that the key hurdle to attracting more investments in the Armenian economy is the country’s problematic investment climate.
“168 Zham” says that Gagik Tsarukian’s return to the political arena was sanctioned and even encouraged by President Serzh Sarkisian. “Thus the authorities are going to once again rig the upcoming elections,” claims the paper. It brands Tsarukian’s Prosperous Armenia Party (BHK) as “false opposition.”
“Of course Gagik Tsarukian himself will decide whether or not to return to politics,” editorializes “168 Zham.” “As an entrepreneur and philanthropist, he has done many good things for Armenia. He can be useful in politics as well because he is the only oligarch -- and therefore a source of money -- who is fully or partly outside the government.” But the paper criticizes as “theatrical” the stage-managed prelude to Tsarukian’s comeback.
(Tigran Avetisian)
Facebook Forum