The Armenian National Congress (HAK) and the RA government have finally clarified the issues that will serve as the crux of continued dialog - elections.

Negotiations will only center around the following issue – to what extent can snap elections be held within the time parameters set out by the HAK.

This is to say that the two sides will have to decide by October whether it is appropriate to hold snap presidential and parliamentary elections and what measures will have to be enacted to ensure that these elections are free and fair.

In other words, whatever the final mix, it will only deal with the issue of elections and mainly serve the interests of the government and HAK.

But the ramifications of these talks between the two main opposing groups will have its impact across the entire political field and influence those forces left out of the process.

The government and the HAK are, in essence, writing the rule book for all players large and small.

Such an approach cannot be welcomed by those "marginalized" groups preparing for the elections, but, they have no one else to blame but themselves.

For the past seven months they have stood on the sidelines, merely disparaging developments as the process has unfolded, rather than coming up with alternate formulas or agendas for such dialog.

But the core problem rests in society itself. In the end, it's the voters, society at large, who form the government.

So the question is whether these talks serve the interests of society.

In essence, these talks are taking place outside the purview and/or supervision of society.

If those doing the negotiating were only defining an agenda that deals with their issues, the above circumstance wouldn't be that crucial. But the two sides state that they are acting in the interests of the society, even though they prefer to operate on the sidelines of society.

Thus, despite the decisions adopted regarding elections, the internal level of doubt and suspicion will not be overcome.

This factor isn't in the best interest of HAK since it seeks to offer itself up as the servant of the people and working in the interests of all.

Thus, in the first case, it is the HAK that should be concerned to have as great a level of civic and public participation in the process as possible. This would also limit the government's chance to drag its feet or manoeuvre for position.

It cannot be ruled out that the government's tactic is to deepen the popular distrust of HAK by constantly meeting it halfway.

HAK understands that whether or not the government is pursuing such a line, to continue the process in such a framework means the outright dissolution of its potential electoral base.

This is why the HAK has set an October deadline for snap elections and September as the deadline to reach a corresponding agreement.

It also cannot be ruled out that the two sides will seriously pursue the possibility of holding snap elections.

For the past two weeks, the government not only hasn't ruled out the possibility but has officially declared that such developments cannot be ruled out.

However, there are at least two political prerequisites that do not rule out the possible holding of snap elections, regardless of the HAK's desires on the matter.

The first is the unprecedented situation in the Karabakh matter and the fact that the international community no longer hides the possibility of forcing the parties to sign an agreement on basic principles.

Snap elections resulting from joint talks with the opposition, might serve to temporarily stave off such pressures from without.

The second is the unproductive economic policies pursued by the government leading to an uncontrolled exodus from the country and unrealized budgetary predictions for the 1st half of 2011.

But the question is whether Serzh Sargsyan will agree to snap presidential elections. Probably not.

The way I see it, the powers that be will allow for snap parliamentary elections only.