The start of another parliamentary pre-election campaign was actually given in Armenia, which is taking place in the conditions of unprecedented and extremely difficult geopolitical realities for the country. Against the background of unquenchable disputes regarding foreign policy, painful regional transformations and the pressures exerted on traditional national structures, particularly the Armenian Apostolic Church, the Armenian society must once again make a strategic choice.
However, are the political forces ready to offer the citizens a real alternative, and can we talk about a truly competitive struggle under the current conditions? Why did the pre-election campaigns of different camps paradoxically resemble each other, and what role do external actors play in shaping the future alignment of forces?
About the degradation of party institutions, the phenomenon of the “remote” election campaign of opposition leaders, the unique geopolitical paradoxes of supporting the current government, and ways to overcome the dangerous internal division in society. VERELQDoctor of Political Sciences, Head of the Chair of Applied Sociology of Yerevan State University tells Arthur Atanesyan։
Photo: Artur Atanesyan, source: Champord weekly
VERELQ. Mr. Atanesyan, how do you assess the start of the parliamentary election campaign in Armenia in the current reality? In your opinion, is it possible to talk about an equal and competitive electoral environment for the government and the opposition in Armenia?
Arthur Atanesyan. It seems to me that we can talk about it at this stage. Even if we look at street billboards, they provide a fairly uniform common information platform to all the major candidates who were willing to pay for their advertising campaign. Not everyone could afford such expenses, but visually, all the main subjects are presented quite equally, even with a color gamut.
Sometimes there is a feeling that they are representatives of one political force. we see RA Prime Minister one by one on rotating street posters Nikol Pashinyanas a candidate of the ruling party, then a major Armenian businessman, leader of the opposition “Strong Armenia” alliance Samvel Karapetyan, հետո՝ Arman Tatoyan (former RA Human Rights Defender (Ombudsman), who became an active social and political figure).
It gives the impression that the same color tones are used and the same public relations specialist works with them. To me it is strange and wrong from the point of view of effectiveness of propaganda. I would advise them not to do similar things, because in the public perception, the boundary line between the opposition and the government is erased.
However, the real political work carried out by the ruling and opposition forces is invisible, and it will not be uniform. The administrative resource in Armenia is traditionally used by the power that is trying to be re-elected, and I think it will be the same now.
VERELQ. In the context of equal political struggle, reports are regularly received about the use of administrative resources and mechanisms of law enforcement agencies by the authorities, and the authorities, in turn, accuse some opposition forces of buying votes. Do you notice this and does it create barriers to equal struggle?
Arthur Atanesyan. I find that the pre-election campaign in any state appears to be conducted in a similar way. the ruling elites can always find opportunities to put some pressure on the opposition.
But the opposition also has its own resource: “free hands”. He can afford more than the government in his rhetoric and actions. The opposition reflects only a part of society, while the ruling elite is obliged to be guided by the common interests of the country and is constrained by state frameworks. Therefore, I think that the Armenian opposition could have done much more in the pre-election campaign than it is doing now.
VERELQ. One of the representatives of the opposition, Samvel Karapetyan, who is considered the main rival of the government in these elections, is conducting the pre-election campaign, so to speak, in a semi-free state (he is under investigation and under house arrest). How does this factor affect the pre-election situation?
Arthur Atanesyan. I think that, of course, it is bad. But, on the other hand, he is not alone in his political power: he has a team. In addition, he regularly makes video messages and speeches in front of voters. Being confined in his own house allows him to go out into the information field. He carries out his communicative activity quite openly, and if the voter needs to hear him personally, then he has that opportunity.
VERELQ. Along with the development of the campaign, are there certain centers of gravity in the opposition camp that crystallize that political field, or does everything remain divided for now?
Arthur Atanesyan. Centers of gravity are related to their traditional effectiveness. in this sense, it is both Gagik Tsarukyan and Robert Kocharyan, and now Samvel Karapetyan himself, and, of course, Nikol Pashinyan himself.
(Gagik Tsarukyan is a big businessman and the leader of the “Prosperous Armenia” party. Robert Kocharyan is the second president of Armenia (1998-2008) and the leader of the “Armenia” opposition bloc – editor’s note).
These individuals ensure the political weight and authority of their forces. Unfortunately, nothing has changed for us in this regard. As before, the political party is associated exclusively with the personality of its leader, and the full institutionalization of the parties has not yet been achieved. Such is our political culture. All other small parties are also represented primarily by certain persons. Roughly speaking, there is a basic structure of the political field and there is a “bench” who sit and wait to be called up, just like in football.
VERELQ. What alternative political scenarios could have played out that we are not currently seeing? And what role might overt or covert support from the church have played? Relations between Nikol Pashinyan’s government and the Armenian Apostolic Church continue to be extremely tense after the end of the 2020 war. Clergy has repeatedly harshly criticized the government and supported opposition movements against territorial concessions, while the authorities in response accuse the church of meddling in politics.
Arthur Atanesyan. I expected much greater unity from the opposition parties in defense of the church, but now I don’t notice it at all. At first, it seemed that many of them entered the active political field due to the precedent of strong pressure exerted on the church itself, acting as an opposition through its protection.
But when the pressure from the authorities decreased, the parties stopped actively interacting with each other. Their slogans aimed at the defense of the Armenian Church were correct and similar, but now that argument has weakened in their rhetoric, and no real consolidation has taken place.
VERELQ. How will the current political situation and the level of competition affect public confidence in the election results? How legitimate will they be in the eyes of the public?
Arthur Atanesyan. This time, I see direct support to the ruling party from European partners, which is expressed not only by the behavior of the leaders of the European Union countries, but also by state support through financing and joint programs personally built with the Prime Minister of Armenia.
(Armenia’s foreign policy course in recent years has been characterized by active rapprochement with the West (EU and USA) and attempts to sign a peace treaty with Azerbaijan and regulate relations with Turkey at the same time. The opposition considers this course destructive and accuses the government of handing over sovereignty — editor’s note).
Also, for the first time in our history, we are witnessing the mediated support of the ruling party by Turkey and Azerbaijan. nothing like this has ever happened. And who among the foreign forces is acting in favor of the opposition? No one. The ruling elite has an absolute international advantage. I am sure that the observers of the European Union will also speak in favor of the results of their elections. And if the results are not what they want, they may not recognize them.
The pre-election campaign is going on very non-objectively. If in the past we considered that democratic countries objectively evaluate the transparency of electoral processes, then the current purposeful support to the ruling power by the European Union seems undemocratic to me. It is not democracy that prevails, but the interests of certain regional forces, which are realized through the mechanisms of elections.
VERELQ. In other words, do you perceive the recent European Political Community and Armenia-EU European summits and announcements held in Yerevan as an advance support for the ruling party?
Arthur Atanesyan. Yes, of course. Those summits were used by the leaders of European countries to express support for a certain political force to the detriment of alternatives, rather than to support the Armenian people or the institution of democratic elections in general. In this sense, democracy in European countries is not the same in practice as it is declared in words.
In addition, a unique and complex geopolitical configuration has been created. Azerbaijan, Turkey and France, being in deep contradictions with each other, suddenly started supporting the same ruling party in Armenia. The opposition has no similar unique external support.
VERELQ. There is now a severe polarization of public sentiments in Armenia, reaching the point of open hostility between different camps. Will this polarization be softened by the election results, or will the problem of division remain?
Arthur Atanesyan. It seems to me that this polarization will simply move within the walls of the parliament and will continue even after the elections, between the ruling power and the new opposition parties. It will not decrease in the society itself.
I would very much like the community of political scientists, scientists, intellectuals and leading mass media to put a strict condition before all political forces without exception. “We will elect you only if you stop bringing conflict into our society and maintain the boundaries of basic decency in any discussion.”
Today’s opposition, unfortunately, is no better than the government in terms of dividing citizens into “blacks” and “whites”, owns and foreigners. The main message to all candidates should be: the pre-election campaign should in no case go beyond the scope of the joint issue of preserving Armenian statehood, instead of serving narrow party interests. I am sure that such a constructive message would be liked by the society and would be gratefully received by any section of it.
—