When a frog is thrown into a pot of boiling water, it immediately jumps out. But when you place the same frog in a pot of cold water and gradually bring it to a boil it stays in the water and eventually dies. This is the concept expressed by sociologist Gayaneh Ghazaryan during an interview about European and Armenian models of civil society. "The example of the frog was born from the notion that our society presently finds itself in a borderline situation that cannot be completely assessed as either negative or positive. Such in-between situations are very important. You can either die or wake up. We are on this line and I don't know what awaits us later on," says Gayaneh The fact that we are in a borderline situation is also born out by the events that occurred at the end of May, when the police were detaining young people entering the newly-opened Freedom Square in Yerevan. Gayaneh believes this was absurd and that we are not living in a police state but in a conditions of a "bandit regime". "The police have become paid bodyguards that defend the illegal interests of the authorities in power," she says. Nevertheless, even in these conditions there is a civil society in Armenia; but a uniquely Armenian variant. "Yes, we have a civil society here. It simply isn't the ideal European type that we try to compare ourselves with which leads us to automatically say we have no civil society here in Armenia. We have our variant," says the sociologist. If the units and institutions in Europe, the structural manners, correspond to the laws of the land, then the norms of the civil society in Armenia haven't been formed. "One can say that we have a shadow civil society, just like we have a shadow economy, because the rules by which it functions do not correspond to laws on the books. They are unwritten laws that work in an amazing way." The sociologist says that the European model of civil society takes form only when an individual's principal revenue generating status, his or her life activities, correspond to that unit of which he or she is a formal member. For example, if someone is a teacher, they must equate themselves with the teaching community and make a living by teaching. "But here, that's not the way it is. We are formal members of this or that group, but  our actual life's activity has no connection with it. Thus, here there can be no talk of being conscious of that group's interests. For example, if I am a doctor but the bulk of my revenue is derived from non-formal and  sometimes illegal means, then the interests of that formal group, of which I am a member. the community of physicians, loses their importance," says Gayaneh. The shadow civil society also solves its problems, but according to the rules of corruption - finding an acquaintance, bribery, familial relations. Thus, all formal rules have no connection to actual life activity. "A person confronted with a problem doesn't go to the courts, but rather starts off on the neighborhood and family level to resolve it. Thus, formal institutions become fictitious. When civil interests are perceived as personal problems that must be solved on a personal level via shadow methods, and not by uniting around common interests, there can be no European model of civil society," the sociologist says. "Our internal problems are dictated from without" Gayaneh Ghazaryan singles out two problems inherent in our society. The first is that the revenue generating status of a citizen does not correspond to the status of which he or she is a formal member. The other is that there is another layer on top of that shadow civil society - the fictitious civil society; civic organizations that are not created on the basis of problems in the society. "In Armenia, civic organizations solve problems that are devised externally, in the form of grant proposals. Thus, in order to receive funds, they are obligated to show that such a problem exists in Armenia and then to get to work to remove that problem. Thus, it turns out that others are deciding what problems we face here for us. All the while, it should be the civil society that deals with such issues." Gayaneh notes that civic organizations sometimes fabricate problems, present them to international organizations and begin to solve them. "Either the problem exists here or it doesn't. But it is never a priority. For example, we have many serious problems dealing with poverty, children's education and families with many kids, but we are busy dealing with the plight of dogs on the streets. Sure, this is also a problem but first let's solve the problems faced by poor children and then we can defend the rights of animals wandering around on our streets," says the sociologist. Gayaneh Ghazaryan says the first seeds of a civil society forming could be noticed after 2008 and that certain groups are already conscious of their group interests. "The 2008 movement resulted in a great positive change; it woke up society and imparted the realization of a global problem - that the situation is problematic. This was a huge shake-up." The sociologist proposes an approach to dismantle the shadow civil society and to construct one within the legal framework. "It is necessary to unite those individuals that are conscious of their group interests, who outline the problems and participate in their resolution. This would be a real social initiative and such individuals would struggle since they are engaged in problems of vital importance to them. But if this once again turns into merely a way to funnel money by adapting to problems imported fro overseas, they will be doomed to become merely a fictitious or sham civic organization. Gayaneh Ghazaryan believes that we cannot solve our problems just by foreign means. However, without adequate financing, it will not be possible to struggle for the long haul. "Thus, we must find such financing that is interested in solving real and not fabricated problems. This can be achieved by those forces in the diaspora that consciously desire to advance our government as a government and not a reservation." Comparing the situation today with that of the past, the sociologist views it as positive. "We are in a good state today. Here's a few examples. A few years ago the authorities bulldozed historic buildings and no one raised their voice. Remember the destruction of the stone crosses in Jugha. It lead to no movement arising in our society. These are manifestations of an extremely sick society where the most important symptom is indifference. Today, in contrast, just look at all the hoopla raised over the Catholicos building a summer residence in Yerevan." In Gayaneh;s opinion, representatives of the middle class are the ones attempting to build a European model of civil society in Armenia, in addition to those who possess next to nothing and who haven't found their niche here in this country. "There is one core group here in Armenia that attempts to struggle against all existing problems. Basically, they are the same people, whether the issue is the language, the environment, Students' Park, the summer residence. This shows that we are in a borderline, crisis state. If the process develops in a positive fashion, rather than fading away, than each of these individuals must split off, with each defending his or her interests, but at the same time assisting others. It would be much more effective this way.