It is quite apparent that after the return of President Serzh Sargsyan from his worldwide trip to the Diaspora that the Armenian people will find itself in a very dangerous set of circumstances. His entire tour was met with a vociferous and unprecedented wave of protests. They were more influential than the meetings the president had with community representatives and the meaningless bantering repeated during them. It is apparent to even the most casual of observers that not only has the domestic opposition risen up to oppose the foreign policy initiatives of Armenia but also a large swath of the Diaspora as well. The joint statement of the three traditional political parties of the western United States points out that the aggressive reaction of the Diaspora has been brought about by the fact that the Armenian government failed to consult with it prior to the pre-signing of the protocols and that the Diaspora was basically presented with a fait-accompli. The Diaspora basically regards the presidential tour as too little, too late, and meaningless. The first and probably most damaging consequence of this tactical blunder by the presidential staff has gradually resulted in the near total lack of trust in the president and his team of advisors. This attitude of the Diaspora has lead to the overwhelming demand of formulating a new political agenda in Armenia, with completely new overtones. On the eve of the president’s Diaspora tour, the ARF and Heritage Part issued a joint statement that was nothing less than the crystallization of the concerns and demands of the Diaspora. The two parliamentary forces regarding as parts of the opposition demanding that those points included in the Protocols dealing with the mutual recognition by Turkey and Armenia of their “common border” and the creation of an inter-governmental sub-committee to study the historical archives and documents be withdrawn from the document. By doing so, these parties assumed the function of directing and molding a wave of pan-Armenian discontent that leads to the creation of a totally new political pole. On Tuesday, October 6, at the initiative of the ARF, twelve political parties issued a joint statement that declared their opposition to the signing of the protocols. They demand that “the protocols not be signed in their present form and that changes be made to neutralize the threats contained therein.” This collaboration amongst the twelve parties must naturally be regarded as merely a stage. First, this union is based around a specific problem, without an overriding ideological platform and deep mutual distrust exists amongst the forces involved. In addition to the fact that this initiative is a serious springboard for the ARF and Heritage to reestablish their oppositional credentials in the political arena and to reap new political dividends it pushes the radical opposition, the Armenian National Congress (HAK) to the margins. HAK leader Levon Ter-Petrosyan, during his latest public address, declared that he was leaving the field to other forces. Thus, he sentenced HAK to the role of spectator regarding the matter. Regarding the process of Armenian-Turkish rapprochement, the HAK position of “Being against it while being for it”, has offered the “nationalists” the chance to create a new oppositional field not subject to HAK oversight and to exclude internal social/political issues from the agenda. In other words, a new opposition is being formed that, not combining the domestic and external challenges and by displaying a selective approach to the issues of most concern to the society, has its eyes on reshaping the political arena, in which the Diaspora is starting to have greater impact. In essence, a situation is taking shape when internal political reshaping is taking place on the basis of internal national cleavages and alienation. If, to date, estrangement was taking place in relations between a large segment of the Armenian public and the government, under the silent gaze of the Diaspora, it has now begun to draw in the Diaspora as well and has taken on pan-Armenian proportions. At the basis of these relations lie those issues that directly impact on the existence of the Diaspora, on the one hand, and the yearnings and concerns of the RoA authorities not to lose their political base. These mutually exclusive aspects can also lead to the deepening of mutual intolerance. At the same time President Sargsyan declares in Paris that it is unacceptable to allow splits within different segments of the Armenian nation, Galust Sahakyan, vice-president of the ruling Republican Party, and party member Karen Avagyan, state that those who seek to manipulate the issue of Genocide recognition for political gain are the “dregs of the nation”. Putting it mildly, this is a very dangerous mentality that already shows signs of deepening. Aramayis Mirzakhanyan, Professor of the Stockholm Institute of Technology and representative of the Left Party, responding to the latest “masterpiece” remarks of Galust Sahakyan, declared that,”…anyone who can label thousands of Diaspora Armenians in such a manner must a Turk-lover”. We cannot but note that the banners carried by protestors in Paris and Los Angeles charged President Sargsyan with national perfidy. Once again we, and this time the entire nation, find ourselves in a hopeless downward skid in exposing traitors, dregs and hidden Turks. Such a path can lead to nothing good.