Armenian Revolution Quickly Associated with Color Revolutions, Political Scientist

Political scientist Suren Sargsyan writes on his Facebook page:

1. The balance of power, equilibrium, and deterrent mechanisms established in our region cannot be disrupted. The three countries of the South Caucasus have their own external political "patrons": Georgia has the USA (EU), Azerbaijan has Turkey, and Armenia has Russia.
2. The question of selecting a "patron" has been influenced not so much by the desire of the patronized party but rather by geography and geopolitical realities. This is the arrangement of things in our region, and any attempt or even hint at disrupting this balance causes tremors.
3. A "patronized" smaller country cannot attempt to change its patron on its own or disrupt the balance. It can, but it must pay a heavy price for it.
4. The Armenian revolution quickly began to be associated with color revolutions. This opinion was formed in Russia due to the emergence of pronounced anti-Russian elements in the higher echelons of power. Tensions began to rise in Moscow, as the prospect of disrupting the mentioned balance was noticed (the anti-Russian governments of Georgia and Ukraine, which initially worked normally with Russia in the first 2-3 years, came to mind). This was naturally noticed in Ankara and Baku as well, seeing it as an opportunity.
5. Unfortunately, the Armenian authorities did nothing to demonstrate to the world that they did not conduct a color or Soros-sponsored revolution. On the contrary, anti-Russian or Soros-aligned figures came to power. This raises the question: if your government is not Soros-aligned, then why have you given power to "Soros-aligned persons"? What, are you in debt? Are you obligated? If not, then remove them! If you don’t remove them, then something is wrong. This question has been raised from Washington to Moscow, and believe me, there is no answer.