Photographs Unravel Turkey’s Ethnic Tapestry

PHOTOGRAPHS UNRAVEL TURKEY’S ETHNIC TAPESTRY
By Sabrina Tavernise

International Herald Tribune
March 10 2008
France

SAMSUN, Turkey: They were suspected to be missionaries. Then
fugitives. But when the motley band of Turkish intellectuals finally
arrived in this Black Sea city last month, people seemed to understand
that they really only wanted to tell stories.

The group – a Kurdish feminist, an Armenian writer, and an academic and
a photographer, both Turkish – were presenting a book of photographs
of people from Turkey.

The book counted 44 different ethnicities and sects across Turkey,
and captured them in pictures dancing, eating, praying, laughing and
playing music. If it sounds innocuous, it was not. Turkey, a country
that has had four military coups in its 85-year history, has a very
specific line on cultural diversity: Anyone who lives in Turkey is
a Turk. Period.

Attila Durak, a New York trained photographer, compiled the book,
traveling around Turkey for seven consecutive summers, living with
families and taking their portraits.

His intent was to show that Turkey is a constantly changing
kaleidoscope of different cultures, not a hard piece of marble
monoculture as the Turkish state says, and that acknowledging those
differences is an important step toward a healthier society.

"People see themselves in the photographs, and they realize they are
no different," said Durak, whose book, "Ebru: Reflections of Cultural
Diversity in Turkey," was published in 2006. "Those Kurdish people
have kids who play together like ours," he said, referring to viewers’
reactions. "Look, they dance the same kind of wedding dance."

Ever since Turkey became a state in 1923, it has been scrubbing its
citizens of identities other than Turkish. In some ways, that was
necessary as a glue to hold the young country together. European powers
were intent on carving up its territory, a patchwork of remains from
the collapsed Ottoman Empire, and Muslim Turkishness was a unifying
ideology.

But it forced families from different backgrounds, who spoke different
languages, such as Armenian, Kurdish, Greek, Georgian, Macedonian,
Bosnian, to hide their identities. Family histories, such as the
crushing events of Turkey’s genocide against Armenians in 1915, were
never spoken of, and children grew up not knowing their own past
or identity.

"Memories like that were whispered into ears behind closed doors,"
said Fethiye Cetin, a lawyer who learned only in her 20s that her
grandmother was Armenian. "There was a big fear involved in this,
so the community itself perpetuated the silence."

It is that locked past Durak and his colleagues seek to open. Their
method is telling their own stories to audiences across Turkey as an
accompaniment to exhibits of Durak’s photographs to open a conversation
about the past and chip away at stereotypes.

The academic, Ayse Gul Altinay, an anthropology professor from Sabanci
University in Istanbul, is a kind of national psychiatrist, identifying
the most painful points from the country’s past and offering a way
to think about them that is most direct route to healing.

She uses the Turkish art form, Ebru, the process of paper marbling
that produces constantly changing interwoven patterns, as a metaphor
for multiculturalism.

"We’re not a mosaic, different from one another and fixed in glass,"
said Altinay, who earned her doctorate from Duke University. "Ebru
is done on water. It is impossible to have clear lines or distinct
borders."

In Samsun, a bustling city with a nationalist reputation, the
fifth in Turkey to see the exhibition, the audience was small but
interested. The Armenian writer, Takuhi Tovmasyan, talked about how
she was gruffly banished from a piano recital hall after winning a
competition, when teachers learned her last name, which is overtly
Armenian.

"I hid this feeling for a long time," said Tovmasyan, who has published
a book of family recipes and stories as way to open up a conversation
about the past. "But when I saw these photographs, I decided I needed
to talk about it."

The discussions have hit a nerve. At a presentation in Kars, an
eastern Turkish city, a man in his 50s wearing a suit spoke through
tears about discovering that his family had been Molokan, Russian Old
Believers. It was the first time he was speaking publicly about it,
he said. Others have apologized to Tovmasyan in emotional outpourings.

In Samsun, a young man in a white sweatshirt said, "I personally
apologize for ‘Get out,’ on behalf of all my friends," eliciting
applause. "It’s really a terrible thing."

Durak’s subjects look into his camera with a directness that is
startling. A Jewish man sits in a chair in Istanbul. A gypsy in a
flower print shirt plays the saxophone. A woman from the Black Sea
stands in a doorway, her fingers touching her collarbone.

Each one is labeled for ethnicity and sect, a method of categorization
that initially struck the local authorities in Samsun as something
close to a seditious act.

"They said, ‘we have to investigate, maybe they are wanted by the
police,’ " said Ozlem Yalcinkaya, an organizer from a student group,
Community Volunteers Foundation, who arranged the exhibit. "I said,
‘If they are fugitives, why would they be putting their names on the
exhibition posters?’ "

Another one of their questions went to the heart of what the group is
trying to change. When it was revealed that Tovmasyan was Armenian,
police officials were stumped.

"What do you mean Armenian," Yalcinkaya recalled an officer saying.

"A Turkish citizen, or from Armenia?"

The answer was both – a Turkish citizen of Armenian descent – but
because the Turkish state does not recognize mixed identities, the
concept was foreign and baffling to the police.

In the end, the authorities relented, and the municipality even
allowed use of its lecture hall.

"The genie is out of the bottle," Altinay said. "Too many people are
interested in looking into who we are, who lived on this land before
us," for the healing process to be stopped.

A young woman in the audience echoed that thought, as she apologized to
Tovmasyan. For as gloomy as the past was, the future was more hopeful,
she said, because young people are much more flexible and accepting
than the older generations.

"In a few years time, a lot of people will be doing a lot of
apologizing," she said.

ANKARA: Armenia accused over killing of civilians in Karabakh

Hürriyet, Turkey
March 9 2008

Armenia accused over killing of civilians in Karabakh

Azerbaijans defence ministry accused Armenian forces on Sunday of
opening fire on a residential area near the disputed region of
Nagorny Karabakh and killing two civilians.

The defence ministry said that two men, 26-year-old Niyamaddin
Ismaylov and 38-year-old Etibar Mikayilov, were killed when Armenian
forces opened fire on the residential area and Azerbaijani positions
in the frontline Aghdam region. Two other men were wounded in the
shooting which began Saturday night and continued until early Sunday,
a defence ministry spokesman said. It followed one of the worst
breaches of a 1994 ceasefire in the region in years on Tuesday.

Both sides accused the other of taking advantage of the volatile
political situation in Armenia to violate the ceasefire. The Armenian
capital Yerevan is under a state of emergency after eight people were
killed on March 1 in street battles between riot police and
opposition supporters protesting the result of a presidential
election Azerbaijan claimed that four of its soldiers and 12 Armenian
servicemen were killed in the fighting Tuesday, while Armenia claimed
it had lost no soldiers and that eight Azerbaijanis died.

Armenian forces seized control of Nagorny Karabakh and seven
surrounding regions from Azerbaijan in the early 1990s, in a war that
claimed an estimated 30,000 lives and forced about a million people
to flee their homes. The two countries have cut direct economic and
transport links and failed to negotiate a settlement on the regions
status.

Armenian and Azerbaijani forces are spread across a ceasefire line in
and around Nagorny Karabakh, often facing each other at close range,
and shootings are common.

Necessary to Enter Into a Dialogue

NECESSARY TO ENTER INTO A DIALOGUE

Hayots Ashkhar
Friday 7 March 2008

Despite being blinded with hatred

`I want to state once again that there happened something we were
speaking about for several months on end and were unable to prevent.
And if we were unable to prevent it, we are also to blame.
But today, I don’t want to speak about those who are to blame. What
I want to speak about is the elimination of the consequences of the
disaster. Spite in society has increased; our society is split apart;
therefore, I anticipate all of you to work actively in that direction.
It is necessary to enter into a dialogue. It is necessary to have
debates and explain things even if the opposite party won’t understand
you; even if the opposite party is blinded with hatred,’ SERGE SARGSYAN
said yesterday, addressing the members of the Government.

Azeri Defense Minister Asks For International Assistance In Karabakh

AZERI DEFENSE MINISTER ASKS FOR INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE IN KARABAKH PROBLEM

Interfax News Agency
Russia & CIS
March 5, 2008
Russia

International organizations must step up their efforts to resolve the
conflict in the Nagorno Karabakh, Azeri Defense Minister Safar Abiyev
said at a meeting with Jose Lello, the President of the Parliamentary
Assembly of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), in Baku
on Wednesday.

"International organizations, including the NATO PA, must use their
potential to increase their efforts in resolving the Karabakh conflict.

Otherwise the situation could get even worse, and Azerbaijan might
recur to tougher measures in order to free its lands," Abiyev was
quoted as saying by the Defense Ministry’s press service.

The peace talks have so far been unsuccessful, with Armenia still
reluctant to comply with four resolutions of the United Nations
Security Council, he said.

"The situation on the frontline is increasingly escalating.

Armenia’s consistent breach of the cease-fire agreement may lead to
losses on both sides," the Azeri minister said.

Azerbaijan entered the second stage of cooperation with NATO under
its Individual Partnership Action Plan, Abiyev said. All troops
in Azerbaijan now comply with the NATO standards and its system of
military training has been modernized, he said.

Lello for his part praised the social and economic growth in
Azerbaijan. He mentioned the reforms in Azerbaijan’s Armed Forces and
said he was satisfied with the high level of cooperation between the
country and the alliance.

NKR MFA To Assist OSCE Crisis Monitoring

NKR MFA TO ASSIST OSCE CRISIS MONITORING

PanARMENIAN.Net
06.03.2008 17:57 GMT+04:00

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ On March 6, in connection with the NKR Foreign
Ministry’s demand to conduct a crisis monitoring on the Nagorno
Karabakh and Azerbaijan armed forces contact line near the Levonarkh
settlement, where the Azerbaijani armed forces violated the ceasefire
on night of March 4 early morning, the Office of the Personal
Representative of the OSCE Chairman-in-Office presented a note to the
NKR MFA with a request to assist the conduct of a crisis monitoring
on March 7.

The NKR MFA expressed its readiness to assist in the organization and
conduct of the crisis monitoring and ensure the OSCE Mission members’
security.

>From the Azerbaijani side the monitoring group will be headed by
Personal Representative of the OSCE Chairman-in-Office Andrzej
Kasprzyk, the NKR MFA press office reported.

Lithuania Alarmed Over Violent Dispersal Of Oppositionist Rally In A

LITHUANIA ALARMED OVER VIOLENT DISPERSAL OF OPPOSITIONIST RALLY IN ARMENIA

Baltic News Service
March 3, 2008 Monday 3:06 PM EET

Lithuania’s Foreign Ministry expressed concern over use of force
against peaceful demonstrators after Armenia’s police used truncheons
to disperse oppositionists who were protesting in the nation’s
capital Saturday. Director of Foreign Ministry’s information and
public relations department Violeta Gaizauskaite told BNS that
Lithuania invites both sides to open dialogue, especially since
the international community positively rated Armenia’s presidential
elections. The police used force against supporters of the opposition,
who consider the presidential elections in Feb. to have been rigged,
after the nation’s authorities remarked that their patience has run
out over the unremitting protests for the tenth day.

Serzh Sargsyan, who had hitherto served as Armenia’s Prime Minister,
was elected president Feb. 19 after gathering 53 percent of the
votes. After defeating Levon Ter-Petrossian, who got the support of
21.5 percent of the voters, Sargsyan replaced Robert Kocharyan in
office as Armenia’s Head-of-State. Kocharyan, who is yielding his post
as president, said opposition’s protests are destabilizing Armenia,
the emerging key transit route for oil and gas. Vilnius newsroom,
+370 5 2058512, [email protected]

Viktor Soghomonyan: Inciters, Organizers And Perpetrators Of Teh Eve

VIKTOR SOGHOMONYAN: INCITERS, ORGANIZERS AND PERPETRATORS OF TEH EVENTS OF MARCH 1ST WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE

armradio.am
04.03.2008 18:20

"The law enforcement bodies periodically report the situation to
the President. Until now there has been no violation of the state
of emergency has been registered," RA President’s Spokesman Viktor
Soghomonyan told a press conference in Yerevan today. He noted that
the situation is fully controlled and the corresponding bodies will
periodically provide complete information to journalists.

Viktor Soghomonyan stated that he does not see any possibility for
a dialogue with Levon Ter-Petrosyan.

"Special Representative of the OSCE Chairman-in-Office Heikki Talvitie
already spoke on impossibility of a dialogue at the moment. The
possibility of a dialogue was present before and right after the
elections. However, the staff of Ter-Petrosyan rejected any possibility
of compromise or talks.

After what happened in Yerevan on March 1, I do not see a possibility
of a dialogue. I do not imagine what dialogue one can have with a
person, 30 supporters of which were beating one policeman," Viktor
Soghomonian stated.

"Levon Ter-Petrosian and the members of his team should realize that
they bear the whole responsibility for what happened in Yerevan
on March 1 and for the human losses," Spokesman of the Armenian
President stressed.

"All the organizers, instigators and executors of the unrest
will be punished to full severity of the law", Viktor Soghomonyan
stated, answering the question on the possibility of bringing Levon
Ter-Petrosian to criminal responsibility.

"On March 1, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia already talked
about this – State Protection Service considers it inexpedient for
Ter-Petrosian to leave his house. However, he can sign any time the
document on renouncing the services of state protection and in that
case no one will hinder his movement", Viktor Soghomonyan stated.

The Spokesman of the President noted that "the soon abolition of the
state of emergency meets the interests of all the citizens of Armenia."

Noting that the decree on state of emergency was signed by the
President on March 1 for the term of 20 days, Viktor Soghomonyan stated
that the decision on possible abolition of the state of emergency prior
to the given date will depend on the "development of the situation."

Viktor Soghomonyan refuted the statements, according to which in
reality the number of victims exceeded eight.

"This is another blatant lie, which we evidenced repeatedly in the
course of the recent few months. The very lie was the basis for the
pre-election campaign of Ter-Petrosyan," Viktor Soghomonyan stressed.

Spokesman of the Armenian President refuted the statements and the
claims of Ter-Petrosyan, according to which he allegedly held talks
with the authorities the night of March 2nd.

"This is another lie. I believe that within the coming you will have
the opportunity to communicate with the President of Armenia, and I
propose you to ask the question on those claims of Ter-Petrosian to
the President. I am sure that he will have some things to tell you,"
Viktor Soghomonyan told the journalists.

BAKU: Armenia Attempt To Draw World Attention Away From Anti Human M

ARMENIA ATTEMPT TO DRAW WORLD ATTENTION AWAY FROM ANTI HUMAN MEASURES – VICE-SPEAKER

TREND News Agency
March 5 2008
Azerbaijan

Azerbaijan, Baku, 5 March / Trend News corr. S.Ilhamgizi / Bahar
Muradova, Vice Speaker, believes that the intensification of situation,
related to the current violation of the ceasefire regime by Armenian
Armed Forces on 4 and 5 March, is an obvious attempt of Armenians to
draw the world attention away from the critical situation prevailing
in the country, Muradova said to Trend News.

"Armenian ruling officials undertook anti human measures against their
own population. Therefore, Armenian Armed Forces attempted to draw
world attention away from these measures and violated the ceasefire
regime with Azerbaijan," Muradova stated.

The Vice-Speaker noted that the Foreign Policy department of Azerbaijan
informed international organizations and Minsk Group co-chairs about
the latest violations.

Azerbaijani parliament will express its relation towards the measures
of Armenians to intensify the situation.

The conflict between the two countries of the South Caucasus began
in 1988, due to the Armenian territorial claims against Azerbaijan.

Since 1992, the Armenian Armed Forces have occupied 20% of Azerbaijan,
including the Nagorno-Karabakh region and its seven neighbouring
districts. In 1994, Azerbaijan and Armenia signed a ceasefire
agreement which ended the active hostilities. The Co-Chairs of the
OSCE Minsk Group ( Russia, France, and the US) are currently holding
the peaceful negotiations.

Armenian Assembly Of America Mourns Over Events That Took Place In Y

ARMENIAN ASSEMBLY OF AMERICA MOURNS OVER EVENTS THAT TOOK PLACE IN YEREVAN

DeFacto Agency
March 5 2008
Armenia

YEREVAN, 05.03.08. DE FACTO. The Armenian Assembly of America (AAA)
joined with Armenians around the world in mourning the "senseless
loss of life" as a result of the violence erupted in Yerevan on March
1, 2008.

The members of AAA extended their deepest sympathies to the families
who had lost loved ones.

The Assembly also called upon all parties to adhere "to the rule of
law and to refrain from violence".

The AAA noted that Armenia’s young democracy had faced a crucial
test and expressed hope that the authorities would lift the state of
emergency as soon as possible. "We urge all sides to maintain peace
and order, and urge in the strongest terms that the resumption of
violence be avoided at all costs", the Assembly underscores.

Democracy Conteested: Artmenia’s fifth presidential elections

Published on openDemocracy ()
Democracy contested: Armenia’s fifth presidential elections
By Armine Ishkanian,

Created 2008-03-04 15:52
Armenia’s presidential election of 19 February 2008 appeared to deliver a
clear victory to the candidate who had led in most opinion polls throughout
the campaign, Serzh Sarkisian. Sarkisian, Armenia’s current prime minister
and close ally of President Robert Kocharian, was declared the victor on 24
February with (according to official results) 52% of the vote. But as so
often in the region [1] – and in a pattern increasingly familiar around the
world – the official results were bitterly disputed. The supporters of the
leading defeated candidate (and former president) Levon Ter-Petrossian
responded to the declared outcome by organising a continuous mass protests
in the centre of the capital, Yerevan. In confrontations [2] between
demonstrators and security forces, eight people have been killed.

Armine Ishkanian [3] is a lecturer at the Centre for Civil Society, London
School of Economics. She is the author of Democracy-building and Civil
Society in post-Soviet Armenia [4] (Routledge, 2008)

The election crisis has thus become one of public order and governance [5].
But what is it "really" about, and where does it fit the pattern of
Armenia’s democratic development in the years since independence from the
Soviet Union in September 1991?

Since achieving independence, Armenia has held five presidential elections
(1991, 1996, 1998, 2003, and 2008). Of these only the 1991 election is
considered to have been free and fair. All the others, the most recent one
included, have followed a pattern that has unfortunately become all too
familiar: a flawed process followed by boisterous protests by the
opposition.

In the aftermath of the 19 February 2008 elections [6], demonstrations were
convened in Yerevan’s Liberty Square. The atmosphere at the tented
encampment was celebratory rather than threatening, typified by protestors’
singing and dancing around bonfires. Behind the display of public defiance,
political manoeuvring also continued, as Serzh Sarkisian began reaching out
to other opposition candidates (apart, that is, from his chief rival [7]
Levon Ter-Petrossian) to seek collaborative deals. In quick succession,
Artashes Geghamian [8] and Artur Baghdasarian [9] agreed to cooperate.

The post-election standoff remained tense [10]; across the ten days until 29
February there were a number of arrests and detentions of individual
opposition party members, activists, and some state officials who had
defected to the opposition camp. But few expected what happened in the early
morning of Saturday 1 March, when interior-ministry security forces moved in
and forcibly dispersed [11] the demonstration in the square using tear-gas,
truncheons, and electric-shock equipment. In circumstances as disputed as
the election itself, eight people lost their lives; it appears that
excessive force was used against the demonstrators. The deaths have
intensified the sense of emergency [12] in Armenia, adding urgency to
efforts to resolve the crisis yet embittering an already difficult
[13]situation still further.

The context

The irreconcilable positions of Serzh Sarkisian and Levon Ter-Petrossian
[14] are rooted in Armenia’s post-independence politics. Ter-Petrossian came
to prominence in the late 1980s as the leader of the Karabakh Committee,
which championed the interests and rights of the ethnic-Armenian majority in
Nagorno-Karabakh [15] (an enclave inside Armenia’s neighbour Azerbaijan). He
was elected Armenia’s president in 1991 and was re-elected in 1996, but
resigned from office in February 1998 as a result of a coup that brought
Robert Kocharian [16] to power. Ter-Petrossian then withdrew from public
life and effectively entered voluntary internal exile. It was only in
September 2007 that he re-entered politics with a vitriolic attack on what
he saw as the corruption [17] of his successor and of Armenia’s system more
generally; soon after, he announced his candidacy in the February 2008
elections (see Vicken Cheterian, "Armenia’s election: the waiting game [17]"
(19 February 2008).

After his electoral effort [18] resulted in defeat (with the official
results awarding him 21.4% of the vote), Ter-Petrossian said that massive
voting irregularities and violations had made the declared outcome invalid.
His next step was to appeal to the Constitutional Court to schedule new
elections (another disappointed candidate, Tigran Karapetyan, has said he
also intends to take this route). But after the break-up of the protests,
there are reports that Ter-Petrossian has been placed under house-arrest.

A number of neutral local observers, and international organisations such as
Human Rights Watch, has highlighted voting irregularities and intimidation
at polling-stations across Armenia [19]. But the authorities insist the vote
was fair and that Sarkisian was legitimately elected, and thus characterise
the protests as part of an attempt to seize power by illegal means.

The Armenian government and Sarkisian’s camp defend their stance by pointing
out that a number of significant countries (including France, Russia, and
Turkey) has recognised his victory, and that the finding of the
International Election Observation Mission (IEOM) is that the vote met the
required standards. The IEOM preliminary report [20]indeed declares that the
election was "administered mostly in line with OSCE and Council of Europe
commitments and standards"; but it also says that further improvements are
needed to address remaining problems, including "the absence of a clear
separation between state and party functions, the lack of public confidence
in the electoral process and ensuring equal treatment of election
contestants". The report states: "The conduct of the count did not
contribute to reducing an existing suspicion amongst election stakeholders".

Several Armenian NGOs have criticised [21] the IEOM report as being too
cautious. They released a joint statement [22] arguing that "the apparent
discrepancy between the actual findings of the assessment with the formative
first two sentences of the report resulted in the government only referring
to this paragraph in the international observers’ assessment in order to
legitimise the results of the election". Some demonstrators picketed near
the OSCE offices in Yerevan, shouting "Shame!" to indicate their
disappointment with the observers’ report [23]and what they consider its
lending credibility to a flawed electoral process.

The radically different interpretations of the election result have
dominated political debate inside Armenia (as well as among the large
Armenian diaspora). On 26 February, two days after Sarkisian’s victory was
announced, a rally by his supporters – ostensibly to "thank the voters" was
organised in Yerevan’s Republic Square. People were bussed into Yerevan from
around the country, but many proceeded to abandon the Sarkisian rally and
march up Northern Avenue to join the demonstrators in Liberty Square – to be
met with chants of "Unity!"

The differences

I have observed and written about three of the four past Armenian
presidential elections (1996, 1998, 2003). With this experience in mind, I
find the 2008 elections and the post-election developments to be
significantly different from previous ones – in three ways.

First, several officials, civil servants and diplomats have resigned or been
sacked from their posts for expressing their support for (or for actively
joining) the camp of Levon Ter-Petrossian. They include the deputy
prosecutor-general Gagik Jahangirian (who along with his brother Vahan was
arrested [24] on charges of illegal arms possession and assault on "state
officials performing their duties"); a number of officials from the foreign
ministry (including deputy foreign minister Armen Bayburtian, chief
foreign-ministry spokesman Vladimir Karapetian, ambassadors Ruben Shugarian
and Levon Khachatrian); and civil servants from the trade and
economic-development ministries.

Several army generals have also backed Ter-Petrossian, including Manvel
Grigorian (who heads theYerkrapah [25] [Defenders of the Country] faction)
and Gagik Melkonian; neither has been stripped of his post. Such an open
breach [26] by senior figures was not a feature in past elections; then,
individuals would switch sides only once the final outcome had been
declared – and when they did so, they would move towards the ruling party
rather than (as at present) the opposition.

Second, there has been a flourishing of new forms of media, communication,
and information-sharing. During the election campaign and in the
post-election standoff, Armenian television coverage was greatly skewed in
favour of Serzh Sarkisian; opposition candidates were either ignored or (in
the case of Ter-Petrossian) negatively portrayed.

The absence of independent television channels and the strict loyalty to the
regime of the channels that survive – a situation that has lasted since the
closure of the independent [27]television channel A1+ in 2002 – has meant
that the reporting of the opposition protests has been scarce to
non-existent. The broadcasts have not reflected the reality of what is
happening in the streets and squares. This has led civil-society activists
to send an open letter criticising the H1 public-television channel’s biased
presentation.

Such bias was a feature in previous elections as well. Armenians have
responded by transmitting news in a familiar, more trusted and legitimate
source: word of mouth. But in addition, what is different this time is that
individuals have begun using new forms [28] of communication technology –
mobile-phones, email, blogs, and video-sharing websites such as YouTube – to
share and exchange information and opinions about the latest developments.
These innovative means of sharing information, news, and comments have
circumvented the official television and radio channels’ information
blockade, and created a "virtual public sphere" for debate and deliberation.
You Tube in particular has added a new dimension by hosting all sorts of
clips including demonstrations, arguments at polling stations, and
discussions with people on the street.

Third, the election itself and especially the demonstrations in their
aftermath have witnessed the emergence of a generation of young Armenians as
an active political constituency. The festive atmosphere in Liberty Square
has attracted increasing numbers of young people, despite threats of
expulsion or suspension against them (allegedly) made by the deans and
rectors of some universities. This, again, is a contrast with previous
elections, particularly in 1998 and 2003, when protest rallies were composed
mainly of older people whose nostalgia for the good old Soviet days led them
to support former Armenian Communist Party leader Karen Demirchian [29]
(1998) and his son Stepan Demirchian (2003).

There is a debate here between those who argue that many young people
support Ter-Petrossian because they do not remember how difficult life was
during the early years of his rule, and those who believe they are attracted
by his charisma and message of democratic reform. But the fact of change in
elite opinion, technology and generation is striking.

The outcome

After Armenia’s first four presidential elections, protests either dwindled
of their own accord or were violently suppressed by the authorities. The
option of force has been used too after the fifth election, yet – so far –
it does not appear that this is the end of the story.

Whatever happens next, it is clear – and encouraging – that these elections
engendered heated public debate about Armenia’s future, the past it has
traversed since gaining independence in 1991, the nature of its leadership,
and the country’s political culture. However an increasingly tense situation
is resolved, the early weeks of 2008 will have a significant impact on
political developments and the future of democracy in Armenia.

http://www.opendemocracy.net