(Saturday, October 25)
“Haykakan Zhamanak” sees an “essential difference” between the October 24 rally of the trio of opposition parties and their rally held two weeks before. According to the daily, this difference comes down to the fact that Gagik Tsarukian, the leader of the largest of the three parties, Prosperous Armenia (BHK), this time around stated that under certain circumstances they would opt for forcing the government to hold early elections. “In fact, this is a language of ultimatums, though in his speech Tsarukian also expressed willingness to start negotiations on the subject,” the paper observes.
“168 Zham”, on the contrary, describes Tsarukian’s speech as “too general”. “He criticized the government without naming names, spoke about the difficult socio-economic situation in the country, the need to break the “political monopoly”. But as for the demand for a change of government that many expected to hear from Tsarukian, it was made indirectly, with reservations.”
“Chorrord Ishkhanutyun” summarizes the main message of the rally: “While the tactics of the movement has not been published, the “roadmap” is approximately clear: the trio expects that the current leadership will give up the idea that in the coming decades all matters in Armenia will be solved through Melik Adamian Street [where the main office of the ruling Republican Party of Armenia is located]”.
“Zhamanak” takes in its stride what it describes as “impressive attendance” of the rally considering that among its organizers was also the BHK, a party known to have gathered large crowds also in the run up to parliamentary elections. “If anything surprising was to be expected, it would have been statements about further actions. But in this regard nothing unexpected happened either,” the paper adds.
“Hraparak” suggests that the new wave of opposition rallies has provided a “glimmer of hope” to some, while also disappointing others who have expected more dramatic developments: “They expected that the rally would not end in another good-bye, that the start of a sit-in or a hunger strike would be announced, that they would not be sent home but would be kept in the square for days, weeks or months until there was a change of government… But no sitting protest followed, simply another upcoming rally was announced.”
(Tigran Avetisian)