A couple of weeks ago, a local dispute erupted outside the premises of the Investigation Department of Yerevan between two sides of the law enforcement system: a police officer from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, accompanied by scores of his close relatives, attacked two investigators and brutally beat them. At first glance, the incident might seem like a private matter of settling scores according to "street rules," but in reality, it shows signs of a much more serious and deep-seated process. It is entirely possible that this occurrence is a harbinger of a systemic crisis within the regime, signaling that the bitter times of the "Black Swan" are about to arrive.
The term "Black Swan" has been in use since 1697, when humanity learned that not “all swans are white”: a species of black swan was discovered in Western Australia, and the novelty of the "Black Swan" entered circulation as a figurative expression to describe rare, unexpected events and phenomena, whether positive or negative, that carry significant consequences. The metaphor is analogous to the fragility of any system of thought and a testament to the fallacy of assumption. A set of conclusions can be undone once any of its fundamentals is proven false. Now, within the logic of the Black Swan, let us try to understand the current situation in the Republic of Armenia, its consequences, and its predictability.
Description of the situation: a) at least for a large segment of the public, the election results are questionable, meaning the degree of the regime's legitimacy is extremely low; b) the mainstay of the regime is now the security forces, resulting in their expanded role and significance; c) the number of politically motivated criminal cases has sharply increased, leading investigative bodies to view themselves as a reliable pillar of power and, naturally, to demand dividends while feeling above the law; d) the police are a crucial component of the administration. Amid the collapse of constitutional norms and rights, when both ruling and opposition forces are discredited, police officers assault MPs endowed with a primary mandate right inside the National Assembly, subsequently demanding new economic and financial dividends; e) in the initial stage, repressive organs suppress political opponents, after which the machine demands new victims and begins persecuting "proud citizens."
The consequences: if different wings of the security forces begin using force against one another due to the regime's lack of legitimacy, it signifies that the mechanism of unified command and trust within the government is weakening. The incident near the premises of the Investigation Department of Yerevan, the brawl that broke out between a police officer and investigators, attests precisely to this. Previously, both the police and investigative units fell under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Internal Affairs; currently, the police remain under the Ministry of Internal Affairs, whereas the Investigation Department of Yerevan is under the authority of the Investigative Committee. As collisions recur, the sides begin to act as power centers asserting their own primacy. It is in such circumstances that a dangerous chain reaction emerges: a legitimacy crisis, rivalry among power structures, internal schisms, and the erosion of governmental control.
It cannot be ruled out that alongside the trial, some members of the ruling elite will back the police officer while others support the investigators, giving rise to new factions and clans. However, the fundamental question in this situation is whether the system is capable of keeping all its security institutions under a unified political command. It is difficult to say, given that our unelected dictator recently discredited the judiciary by claiming there are still judges in the system who support the former regime. Nevertheless, one thing is clear: the police-investigator conflict is not merely a legal or administrative incident; it is a novel manifestation of a systemic crisis.
“Hayatsk Yerevanits” Journal