Against the background of the country's external and internal deepening crisis, the actions, messages and events are becoming full of the logic of the parliamentary elections, the basic, the unwritten rule of which contradicts Stanislavsky's "Lybita in the Uskustve" advice.
During this time, the Republican Party never rule out its possible participation in the elections, still in vain to persuade the opposition's partners, did not cope with the disgusting status quo and did not reach the issue of change of government in 2026. In the current situation, the public speech of any former heads of the country is important as an early international interview, and the recent interview of the second president is to express dissatisfaction with the political discourse, and the shortcomings of their own teammates and correction of mistakes.
As a number of assessments of the second presidential political situation in the world and political life, I did not only not receive convincing answers, but also recorded many contradictions, disputed claims and one-sided perceptions.
What are these traps?
1. Nicole reduces the support of the West and geopolitical changes. No matter how much temptation is the choice of Donald Trump and subsequent developments, let's note the fatal weakening of the nicholas regime, let's not forget that:
. The activities of the new US administration still does not have local manifestations, and the administrative inertia is very large, as well as the US Ambassador to Armenia.
. The victorious energy of the Donald Trump in the Inputyan range is not endless, and soon he will inevitably lead to an increase in internal resistance with foreign policy.
. It is unknown at this time what he will do after leaving the post.
EUROPEAN PROPERTY OF THE MINISTRY OF DEPARTMENT IN THE MAINTENANCE IN THE COUNTRY IN THE MAINTENANCE IN THE CAPITAL AND THE OPPORTUNITIES OF THE WORLD.
2. The current mode has a very low rating. The absolute effect of this reality and one-sided interpretation is also fraught with strategic prospects.
No, the ratings of the main opposition forces have risen significantly.
Frustrated, but the unexpected electorate of the opposition camps is fertile ground for unexpected political projects and technologies.
The summons have repeatedly proved that not only the use of corruption, but also the administrative resource is Einsteins, which can significantly affect their electoral results.
Unfortunately, the current regime wins the opposition in terms of different propaganda, news and political technologies, and the opposition's activities in this field are vital.
3. Gyumri can be a prototype at the national level. This thesis is also deceptive and very vulnerable.
. Local elections, including Gyumri, a very specific city, copy of the republic at the level of the republic, is a methodological error.
. The behavior of the teams adjacent to the second president's election campaign against other oppositionists (in Russian) cannot be tolerant of national elections.
. Currently deepening split and breakthrough in the opposition field will inevitably lead to the dusting of opposition votes, which will use the current regime, obviously greater bonuses.
. At his February press conference, the second president, talking about the possibility of going to the elections and did not state that Nicolei could not be wins. That idea is news from his lips, so to put it mildly, Gyumri does not prove the truth of the second president before that is conceptually different from his previous opinion.
Sargsyan ± Kocharyan =?
At first glance, it may seem puzzling that the second president has given a significant part of his press conference not to Pashinyan's regime, but to the third president of Armenia and the Republican Party. Unfortunately, the assessments voiced not only at least not freezing the chronic-made tension, but also created new discourse collision points. I'm sure this is a software, not a random position, and it is also due to the upcoming elections.
The operation of "Separation for Selection" could not be limited to the "separating" and "separate" immediately by us, and the second president's approaches confirmed this version. Otherwise, what prevented President Kocharyan from accepting and agreeing with President Sargsyan's approach to the approach? The second president, in fact, rejected the proposal of the third president about the "ceasefire" about these unpleasant discussions. Therefore, let me talk about a number of theses.
History review. It is noteworthy that such a tool is not only the Pashinyan regime, but also our partners. The assessments voiced by the second president referred to almost all stations. So.
.1998-2008 Who was supported? I would be honest that I am surprised by the wording, which were not only controversial, but also contained negative energy.
The RPA, as a party, continued to develop and take place in those years, but from the beginning of Vazgen Sargsyan and Serzh Sargsyan's serious role in 1998, after the 2003 presidential election. And Prime Minister Andranik Margaryan, in his turn, did not only enter into the "games" with the opposition field, but also as a reconciling and mitigating image, often took on many strokes against the incumbent president.
According to 2006-2008, the second president's speech in connection with the possible nomination of Vartan Oskanian as an existing and active deputy, the participant of the other was the events that I would not serve, hoping to talk to the second president one day immediately.
This year, though, the second president insisted that he did not think about returning to big politics during those years, but there are statements about other programs, in those years by the Chief of Staff of President Kocharyan Victor Soghomonyan. It will be interesting to hear the president's opinion on this contradiction.
.2018, without this long text, I join the second president to reign with my book, in particular, PS and PPS chapters. I am sure that every knowledgeable and impartial reader is able to do his conclusions. Let me add only that there are contradictions about the assessments given in an interview with this issue.
Criticizing the years of the third president, he also used the "political monopoly" expression, first of all, speaking about us, and then he could push another candidate instead of Sargsyan. In other words, the accusations of "political monopoly" were accompanied by claims about their own political monopoly, the only president and the ruling party to determine the ruling party ...
When talking about 2018, President Kocharian was very gently and carefully carefully treated the role of Prime Minister Karen Karapetyan, whose self-respecting and I accept. At the same time, I think that neither its nor history is "combed" and rounding or sinking the sharp corners of reality.
. In the context of the 2021 elections, the second president, first, bypassed the fact that he claimed to win alone, and our chances were considered a statistical error. Then the extraordinary elections assessed the inevitable, although they were to leave the steam of a heated street fight, and without that active political actors were simply animated. And in the spring, we only considered us the target of the vicious thesis of "former". Unfortunately, this is not the case. Our two teams with Nicolasic Affairs are "exists", although our team is not former in reality, we are preceding.
. It is noteworthy that when talking about the impeachment, the second president emphasized the "if failed, we can't do it for 6 months" thesis, which is very vulnerable. First of all, because of his future plans, he did not mention the prospect of the possible application of that tool on their own initiative. And then, in case of abortion of the current initiative, how do you substantiate the fact that you will not start a mistrust process on its own initiative?
Of course, it's hard to talk about more than 2 hours, a dense and equipped interviewer in writing format. So I may refer to a number of other assessments in other publications. Now I will end with the following suggestion:
In the interview, the second president described Pashinyan as a symbol of defeat and ignorance, offering to create the appropriate Emodi, but he did not say anything about Nicole and a traitor. By accepting and developing President Kocharyan's proposal to create an Emodi in Pashinyan, I suggest it to be considered a symbol of treason, not a symbol of ignorance. Do you agree with Mr. President?
Armen Ashotyan
RPA Deputy Chairman
"Dzoraghbyur" TCC
19.05.2025
