“Zhoghovurd” suggests that even after the dissolution of the parliament that “lost a stable majority after last spring’s change of power” the dangers to the government of acting Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian and the country in general have not been eliminated. “The dissolved parliament will continue to preserve all powers before the formation of the new National Assembly and in a situation like this there is still a high risk that the former ruling RepublicanParty of Armenia (HHK), which is still the largest faction in parliament, together with its former coalition partner – the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutyun) – will start adopting different laws to raise obstacles to the activities of the Pashinian government and artificially escalate tensions. After all, they have nothing to lose anymore. Let’s hope that during this period the HHK will not appear under someone’s influence and will not attempt to do such things but will prefer leaving with dignity,” the paper says.
“Past” writes: “Yesterday, acting Prime Minister Nikol Pashinian made quite a long speech that he himself said was a review of economic problems and the economic situation. In the months following the revolution it was the political agenda that was a priority for Pashinian. And now it seems that his giving importance to the economic agenda is also being outlined… After all, any political system, electoral reforms or anticorruption drives are only instruments, while the main objective is to have a prosperous country.”
“Hraparak” reflects on the decision by lawmaker Hayk Konjorian, a member of the Bright Armenia Party, to quit the party and join the Pashinian-led Civil Contract party, which elicited mixed reactions among political parties and groups: “Some condemned Konjorian’s decision to quit his party, others welcomed his decision to become a member of Pashinian’s political party. But what is important here is the mentality of the people who are in the upper echelons of power in Armenia. For decades we have witnessed how the presidents of Armenia ravaged the country’s political landscape, doing everything to split the forces that could contribute to the strengthening of the political arena. As a rule, the former presidents supported the growth of only one party – the pro-government party that eventually would turn into a group of people gathered around a feeding place.”
(Lilit Harutiunian)