No Unified Position on Amulsar Mine Exploitation Within Government: Narine Dilbaryan

It is evident that there is no unified position within the government regarding the exploitation of the Amulsar mine, which creates the threat of a crisis. Narine Dilbaryan, vice president of the Heritage Party, expressed this view in an interview with Tert.am.

“There are differences in positions within the government. The management crisis, which the Heritage Party has repeatedly addressed, is becoming more apparent now. See, all arrows point to Deputy Prime Minister Tigran Avinyan, who is considered the lobbyist for the exploitation of the mine. His actions are being criticized, and he regularly updates his status on social media, giving the impression that he is left alone.

“Nikol Pashinyan made one speech and then tried to seemingly backtrack, stating that they might need to reconsider, and so on. In other words, it is clear that there is no unified position,” said Dilbaryan, adding that perhaps some are even intimidated by posts about a new revolution.

“They are searching for ghosts of a new revolution, but it seems to me that the ghost of future industrial development in Armenia needs to be clarified instead of chasing after the ghosts of revolution. When the government can truly present a solution to a conceptual question, I believe we will move closer to a public consensus,” she stated.

In presenting her party's views, Dilbaryan emphasized that the Heritage Party values not only the exploitation of a specific mine like Amulsar but also the formation of a state-level, professional consensus regarding the longstanding problems of mining industry.

“The Heritage Party believes there is a clear division within society today, dominated by chaotic emotional approaches. We are rolling back into the grip of emotions, and emotions are poor advisors in professional and national security matters. This means we should not use forceful measures or conclude that any mine's exploitation leads to destruction; instead, we need to study international experience and correlate it with the Soviet-era experience. Moreover, the studies should not be limited to just Amulsar but encompass all mining industry issues,” she noted.

“Judging by expert assessments, Amulsar seems to be a few steps ahead of our mining extraction technologies. This means they are bringing modern technologies. Perhaps we need to clarify and specify solutions for open-pit mining issues and residual problems, but these issues cannot be solved in the streets, in front of the parliament, in parks, or by blocking roads; we will not find solutions this way,” she emphasized.

Dilbaryan recalled that we found ourselves in a similar situation in the early years of independence when there was a chaotic outcry about the danger posed by the nuclear power station. “It does contain a reality, and if you remember, back then, the nuclear power station also stopped, and our energy, born out of good intentions, was directed towards the chemical industry, which was one of the strongest industrial sectors in former Armenia. Consequently, we closed 'Nairit,' then Vanadzor's 'Khimprom,' and afterwards we destroyed our chemical industry. To this day, we have not been able to revive it,” she stated.

According to her, the Heritage Party is ready to initiate public discussions, both on professional and political platforms. “We emphasize the professional aspect (noting that by professional, we mean genuine specialists, not environmentalists born out of noble intentions); we need to gather geologists, doctors, and representatives from academic institutions and listen to their conclusions. Yes, 'Elard' provided its conclusion, and although the study of that organization might be diverse, nonetheless, they have definitely conducted some studies and made points. Therefore, we should not rush, but instead, carry out public discussions after which the entire truth will become evident,” she said.

In response to the question about how they regard the proposal of some political forces to hold a referendum on the Amulsar issue, the party’s vice president stated, “I believe that resorting to a referendum before forming a professional position on the matter is simply naive or a way to evade the precise solution to the issue. The citizen is not informed. Furthermore, an ordinary citizen is not necessarily required to know the depths of open-pit mining methods. We should not burden society with the professional and state security discussions. A referendum can pertain to national security, choosing strategic allies for the country, but solving industrial, economic, and scientific issues through a referendum, especially if it takes place in this emotional atmosphere without professional assessments, is not appropriate.”