Yerevan Intends to Lay the Responsibility of Unpopular Decisions on Moscow: Kolerov

Interview with Modest Kolerov, Russian political analyst, first class advisor of Russian Federation, editor-in-chief of Russian Regnum agency.

Mr. Kolerov, yesterday Armenian PM Hovik Abrahamyan announced on his resignation. The leading political party qualifies this resignation as Abrahamyan’s personal decision, although there are opinions that after recent developments it’s necessary to develop Government of a different quality, and earlier Armenia’s president promised it. In your opinion, why did Armenia’s president initiate these changes?

I think main reason for Hovik Abrahamyan’s resignation was that during the July disorders the claim, besides all other issues, was directed to domestic policy issues as well, and it was initiated out of social reasons. Responsibility of social issues traditionally bears the Government, thus somebody should have born that responsibility for social complaint, and logically, responsible for social complaint became Hovik Abrahamyan.

Greater part of the society seems to be indifferent towards this change, not believing that changes will be recorded. Do you believe that quality of the Government will change by appointing Karen Karapetyan?

Naturally it’ll depend on all steps he’ll initiate. I don’t personally know Karen Karapetyan, thus, I can’t say what changes he’ll initiate and whether the quality of the Government will change and social issues will be eliminated or not. It’ll be better to draw conclusion later, after having his actions as a fact.

It’s being discussed in Armenia that appointment of Karen Karapetyan, who has connections in Moscow and works for Gazprom company, isn’t accidental at all, and that Armenia’s authorities make a gesture to Moscow by this, or his person is preferable for Moscow. In your opinion, may Karapetyan’s appointment be conditioned by Moscow’s attitude towards him? Is the person of Armenian PM important for Moscow?

You gave a proper question with proper suppositions. Firstly, it isn’t important for Moscow who leads RA Government, as Moscow traditionally discusses political, military, economic issues, first and foremost, with the president. Thus, Moscow doesn’t have and can’t give advice to Armenian president regarding the person of head of the government.

Secondly, people, who consider in Armenia, that Karen Karapetyan’s appointment is a gesture directed to Moscow, that gesture should show something in Armenia-Russia relations, then, yes, it’s a gesture. That gesture is addressed both to Russia and the Armenian society. I consider that gesture should show, that Armenia’s authorities coordinate their activity with Moscow in domestic policy. I believe, that gesture bears political nature and attempts to prove what really lacks.

I think, accentuations in Armenia are correct, that gesture isn’t that of Moscow, but of Yerevan, and it’s another question why it’s necessary to show Yerevan as if it acts upon Moscow’s desire, here economic analysis may be made.

What do you think—why?

I consider that in Yerevan they intend to lay responsibility of unpopular decisions on Moscow.

In this case how will Moscow assess Yerevan’s this step and what implication will it have?

It will assess in no way. Moscow doesn’t follow so attentively Armenia’s steps to have some result.

By Araks Martirosyan