Changes of government might occur through election, revolution, coup d'état and military coup. Other exotic forms are not under discussion.

In case of elections, everything is clear, however when the legitimate government finds itself in certain situations and it becomes impossible to maintain the political course, either a new government is formed or, if it is impossible, the parliament is dissolved and the chief "arbiter," the people are called to hold new elections. In other words, in desperate situations as a result of elections, a new political status quo is formed due to the circumstances. Sometimes this process takes place as a result of pressure from the masses, which cannot be called a revolution, it is rather a legitimate constitutional process.

A coup d'état takes place when there is a split within the ruling elite and the first person in power and his political team are replaced by force or non-force.

During a military coup, the security forces remove the political leadership and establish military rule.

It is more difficult to define a revolution. By classical definition, it is drastic change in the ruling power or organizational structure that occurs in a relatively short period of time. During revolutions, fundamental changes take place, new value system, new form of government, new Constitution, sometimes  even new formation are established.

It is important to delve into these concepts to understand what is happening in Armenia. The parliamentary opposition organizes mass protests, closes streets, and stages marches demanding the resignation of the government, with the aim of "saving Artsakh and Armenia."

It seems that what is happening is difficult to compare with the options of change of government listed above. The point is that if we consider it a revolution, the opposition fails to offer any new value system, way to change the government, moreover, any formation. In terms of definitions, this is obviously neither a coup d'état nor a revolt. Perhaps the closest option is to get the government to resign through popular pressure, after which, given the composition of the parliament, early parliamentary elections must take place. Maybe this is the main description of what is happening.

But questions arise here. We all understand that the war has left a deep mark on the people, the existence of Artsakh and our borders are endangered, it is not even clear what those borders are, and the current government does not have clear explanations about the future of the state, what solutions it has and what negotiations are held with Azerbaijan, Turkey, Russia and the West. The government also does not enjoy the trust of the majority of the public. The number of votes of the ruling team during the previous parliamentary elections does not inspire faith, but it is a separate topic why we had such results.

At the same time, it is obvious that the goals announced by the opposition are not sufficient for the people to unite around it. The opposition, like the incumbent government, must also provide clarifications on what proposals it has on the above-mentioned issues and what solutions or concept of solution it offers to the voters after a possible change of government. Against this backdrop the change of government must be accompanied by the nomination of new values ​​and qualities, for which we do not see the demand either.