We imprison Samvel Karapetyan, and the government launches an SS campaign against him, so that he won't be able to speak to the public?
- Armen Sukiasyan

- Jul 5
- 3 min read

The biggest danger to fear is the rapid radicalization of public sentiment, wrote Vahe Hovhannisyan, a member of the "Alternative Projects" group.
"In all the times of independent Armenia, there have been periods of escalation of one degree or another, and it has always ended in tragedy. But this is an unprecedented atmosphere. For all thinking people, in and out of power, those "not involved in politics," permanent observers, and public activists, this should be alarming. There is nothing good in it. There is nothing healthy. Be afraid of it."
Threatening, arresting, filling NSS boxes, "mortar-gunning", arrests, extermination, and killing have become our daily routine, our everyday expressions.
Of course, it is possible to silence people, poison life with the levers of power, but this will only strengthen radical moods. Of course, it is possible to preach hostility and hatred, but this will only aggravate the atmosphere, of course, other things can be done and said from all sides, but this will make the atmosphere even more ugly. All the formulations that are in the recordings of law enforcement officers are in the spoken language of hundreds of thousands of people. This is an abnormality, this situation must be changed, but this is not the problem of law enforcement officers. This is the problem of the political-public elites, and of course, the government, which has the biggest levers. But the government is doing the exact opposite.
From Tavush to Tashir: Radicalization of Moods
A year ago, on these days, Tavush was at the epicenter of public sentiment, today, relatively speaking, Tashir. This means that there is a major mistake on the scale of the entire country.
There are objective, 100 percent factors for the radicalization of public sentiments in our country: 5,000 victims, a much larger number of wounded, the loss of Artsakh, 150,000 Artsakh residents left homeless, tens of thousands of native graves remaining in Artsakh, territorial losses, and of course, endless threats from the enemy. We have been living under the threat of the enemy destroying us every day for 7 years. This is already enough to create abnormal radical sentiments in any country. And if we add to this the aggression of the authorities - constant insults from right to left, arrests from right to left, criminal cases, and an unregulated lexicon, then the atmosphere becomes explosive, from which no one will benefit, but we will all face a disaster.
The hero of the time
This abnormal, aggressive reality must change. There are two ways: internal and external. If we don't do it at the expense of internal resources, then the enemy will do it, after which much will no longer be meaningful in Armenia.
The only way to stop the raging ugliness is through broad public dialogue and programmatic thinking. That is heroism now. Otherwise, we will not avoid a global catastrophe. Let us find within ourselves the strength and wisdom to engage in public dialogue.
Who can be the mediator of internal public dialogue and the standard-bearer for mitigating public radicalization? Historical experience shows that this can be:
1. the church
2. Authoritative individuals (group of individuals), i.e., figures like Samvel Karapetyan.
3. External friends/intermediaries
We don't have the third point: we have reached the point where we don't have an ally, or we no longer represent the interest that would require them to make a serious effort for us.
We imprison Samvel Karapetyan, and the government launches an SS campaign against him. So what? So that later there will be no one to speak to the public?
The narrow ruling clique continues its aggression against the Church. This has led to the fact that the Church and the people have never been more united and close than they are now. But, on the other hand, this aggression weakens the Church's ability to be a moderator of internal reconciliation and internal dialogue.
"Then how do we imagine the sequel?" he wrote.




















