ArmInfo. Considering Armenia in a state allied with Russia today is possible only in theory and in a very distant future. A similar opinion was expressed to ArmInfo by the Chief Researcher of the IMEMO RAS, President of the Scientific Society of Caucasian Studies, D.I. n. Alexander Krylov, commenting on the constituent congress of the movement "Strong Armenia with Russia.
"At the same time, without a doubt, in my opinion, one can only welcome such initiatives. Integration of the post-Soviet countries is in the interests of all participants in this process. As it seems to me, at the moment, considering this initiative, we can talk about its focus on the future. And it can become a reality only if it turns out to be attractive for the Armenian society, "he said.
Krylov determined the prospects for Armenia by the ability of the leadership, political forces and Armenian society, in general, to stabilize the internal political situation. And after that, work out a strategy for the development of the Armenian statehood. Of course, subject to its compliance with post-war realities. According to him, Moscow is undoubtedly interested in such stabilization.
In this light, the political scientist highlighted the interest and desire of Yerevan in the search for both internal and external sources of maintaining internal socio-economic stability. And in fact, initiated by Moscow, the unblocking of transport communications, in his opinion, is of fundamental importance in the future development of Armenia and the entire region.
"At the same time, apparently, the Armenian society is not ready to accept the results of the last war and perceives the ceasefire of November 9 only as a temporary peaceful respite. Nevertheless, despite the post- war drop in the rating of Prime Minister Pashinyan, he, in general, managed to maintain support parts of the population. Some see him as a national leader, and some see him as a lesser evil in comparison with the available alternatives. Additional chances for Pashinyan's political survival are added by the passive majority, disappointed in both the government and the opposition. And, of course, the fragmentation of the opposition itself, " concluded Krylov.