What bothers Heritage most?
Exactly three years ago, on August 1, Levon Ter-Petrosyan formed the opposition Armenian National Congress (HAK) which was comprised of 18 political forces. Some political parties, including the Heritage, refused to join the HAK though they welcomed its formation.
"HAK was not an ideological structure. It aimed to solve a specific problem - to restore the constitutional order in the country," Heritage MP Stepan Safaryan told A1+.
"Later, HAK entered the ideological field, expressing its views on Armenian-Turkish relations and Karabakh issue. HAK's position on the issues clashed with that of Heritage," he said.
"Just then we proposed that HAK clarify its mission in the political shere and specify whether it is an ideological alliance or a body that aimed to contribute to the formation of government."
The Heritage MP recalled the words of Levon Ter-Petrosyan who said that HAK would serve as a tool for power change.
"However, HAK failed to meet its mission," Safaryan said.
The Heritage representative today spoke about HAK's achievements and losses in the past three years.
"The good thing was that HAK vivified the political field and the bad thing was that HAK pursued a policy which stirred up confusion and disappointment with the opposition electorate. As a result, people might get disappointed with the whole opposition. HAK's current strategy is dangerous in the sense that it can arouse disbelief towards the upcoming parliamentary and presidential elections," Safaryan concluded.
