Parliamentary Elections Yet Another Test for Democracy in Armenia
by Onnik Krikorian | March 15th, 2012
With parliamentary elections in Armenia scheduled for 6 May, Onnik
Krikorian interviews American-Armenian analyst Richard Giragosian on the
political situation in the country as the vote draws closer.
—
As Armenia prepares to hold its next parliamentary elections on May 6,
2012, at stake are not only the 131 seats to be contested in the National
Assembly, but also the country’s reputation worldwide. While the last
parliamentary elections held in May 2007 were a step forward according to
the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Office for
Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR), the international body
also noted that `the stated intention by the Armenian authorities to
conduct an election in line with OSCE commitments and international
standards was not fully realized.’
Indeed, as in past elections, the ruling party of power swept the floor
amid allegations from the opposition and civil society organizations of
vote-buying and outright falsification. However the landslide was attained,
it meant that the Republican Party, led by then Prime Minister Serzh
Sarkisian, held 64 seats in the National Assembly. Its closest rival, the
Prosperous Armenia party of MP businessman Gagik Tsarukian, managed just
18. Other governmental loyalists, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation –
Dashnaktsutyun (ARF-D) and Orinats Yerkir (Country of Law), received just
16 and 9 respectively.
More significantly, perhaps, the opposition led by those sympathetic to
Armenia’s first president, Levon Ter-Petrossian, was nowhere in sight,
leaving only Heritage’s seven seats as a genuine check on a massive and
effectively pro-governmental parliamentary majority. Turnout was just under
60 percent of those eligible to vote, but even if the elections were
considered a modest step forward, clashes following the presidential
election the following year, described as `significantly worse’ in a U.S.
Embassy Cable released by Wikileaks, have since raised difficult questions
over Armenia’s democratic direction.
Ten people died in the post-election unrest and a controversial Emergency
Rule Law passed on March 1, 2012, four years to the day since the bloody
clashes, has only raised more concerns. Certainly, given the internal
political situation in the country since then, it is unlikely that the
government can afford any repeat of similar post-election protests.
`There is a new reality in Armenia,’ says American-Armenian analyst Richard
Giragosian, Director of the Yerevan-based Regional Studies Center (RSC).
`Society has changed with people no longer content to witness yet another
round of flawed and fixed elections. While frustration over the February
19, 2008 presidential election simmered, the real outrage erupted once the
Armenian authorities decided to forcibly disperse the unarmed demonstrators
who had gathered for several weeks in a peaceful and generally
well-organized public protest.’
Since the 2007 and 2008 vote, however, many other things have changed in
the political life of the country with the coalition government comprising
the Republican Party, Prosperous Armenia, Orinats Yerkir, and the ARF-D,
minus the latter, following its disagreement with its partners over
attempts to normalize relations with Turkey. Tensions between the two main
governmental forces, the Republican Party and Prosperous Armenia, are also
considered to be on the rise with its leader, Gagik Tsarukian, so far
silent on whether he will back the incumbent president for re-election next
year.
Tsarukian, a former world arm wrestling champion believed to be the richest
of Armenia’s oligarchs, is also considered close to Sarkisian’s predecessor
as president, Robert Kocharian. Moreover, even if no party enjoys
widespread support, his party represents the strongest challenge to the
ruling Republicans – for now at least. Indeed, adding to existing
speculation about the party’s chances, former Foreign Minister Vartan
Oskanian joined Prosperous Armenia last month, but Giragosian is
unimpressed.
`Although Oskanian’s decision to enter or re-enter politics may stem from
his stated goals of seeking political change from within, many see the move
as related to his close relationship with former President Kocharian,’ he
says. `In that context, some see Oskanian as moving to strengthen the
pro-Kocharian Prosperous Armenia party. Either way, although his possible
role as a parliamentarian would help to raise the level of debate and
discourse, I do think that this move weakens him politically as it means
that he can no longer present himself as an independent third force in
politics.’
At the same time, and despite the demonstrations after the 2008
presidential vote, momentum behind Ter-Petrossian’s Armenian National
Congress (ANC) has since faltered and divisions within the
extra-parliamentary opposition alliance have already seen one splinter
group, the Free Democrats, emerge. Last week, another four parties
announced their departure from the ANC because of disagreements with
Ter-Petrossian, but more significantly perhaps, this strong competition
between the Republican Party and Prosperous Armenia still seems most likely
to determine the conduct of the coming elections.
`Clearly there is a serious rivalry between the parties, and the deepening
and intensifying conflict within the ruling coalition continues to define
the country’s pre-election period,’ says Giragosian. `In line with
developments throughout 2011, the most significant political issue
continues to be the significant clash within the pro-government coalition
itself, replacing the more traditional past political conflict between the
opposition and the government. As the pre-election period intensifies, this
conflict between the Republican and Prosperous Armenia parties can only be
expected to escalate.’
One example of this rivalry recently became apparent when Radio Free Europe
(RFE) reported that Vartan Ghalumian, the Prosperous Armenia-affiliated
Mayor of Ijevan, accused his Republican Party predecessor of using party
loyalists to paralyze the legislative body for the administrative center of
Armenia’s North Eastern Tavoush region by boycotting sessions. Days earlier
on International Women’s Day, in what many saw as an election gimmick, both
the Prosperous Armenia and Republican Party competed for attention by
distributing free gifts and flowers in local schools and kindergartens.
Yet, compared to previous elections, that pales into insignificance
compared to what could transpire if bitter rivalry surfaces and remains
unchecked. In the 2007 parliamentary vote, for example, two Prosperous
Armenia election campaign offices in Yerevan were bombed. There were no
casualties, but fingers were pointed at the Republican Party even though
they denied responsibility.
Regardless, such rivalry does not bode well for the coming vote, some
opine, with 37 percent of Armenians already believing national politics is
heading in the wrong direction and only 18 percent believing otherwise
according to a 2010 household survey conducted by the Caucasus Resource
Research Centers (CRRC). Although CRRC’s data for 2011 has yet to be
released, it has already been suggested by those who have seen it that
little has changed. Moreover, as with past votes in Armenia, it remains to
be seen whether policies and issues will finally win out over personalities.
For now, Giragosian says the extent of apathy among the population is not
as noticeable as before with a small but active environmental protest
movement and concerns over deaths in the military adding to already
existing disgruntlement about financial hardship and unemployment. `This
economic undercurrent of discontent is only increasing, especially as the
Armenian authorities are now facing the onset of the effects from the
global financial and economic crisis,’ Giragosian says. `Moreover, widening
disparities in wealth and income have led to a serious socioeconomic divide.
According to the analyst, this division is especially pronounced in terms
of the inequality between the capital, Yerevan, and the regions, with the
situation further exacerbated by inadequate essential public services such
as health, education and other social services. `Most clearly the Armenian
government must now learn to govern – not just rule – the country,’ he
says. `But if the Armenian government fails to fully overcome these
challenges, we may expect a seriously explosive situation.’
Therefore, as the first national elections since the 2008 unrest, all eyes
are on the presidency. `I trust that you, Mr. President, will continue to
pursue reforms to strengthen democratic institutions, to enhance the
independence of the judiciary, to encourage political pluralism and media
freedom, and the protection of fundamental freedoms,’ European Commission
President Jose Manuel Barroso was quoted as saying to Sarkisian in Brussels
on March 12. `[In this context] the conduct of free and fair elections is
of pivotal importance,’ Sarkisian responded.
Giragosian remains unconvinced. `The timing of this election does offer an
important opportunity for the Armenian government to overcome the legacy of
mistrust and the pronounced lack of legitimacy from the post-election
crisis that has hindered the Sarkisian Administration ever since it took
office,’ he says, `but there is serious concern as neither recent local
elections nor any moves by the Armenian government have demonstrated that
the government realizes that this election will be crucial.’
—
http://araratmagazine.org/2012/03/parliamentary-elections-2012/