Global Insight
March 7, 2013
Election 2013: Popular movement aims for “velvet revolution” in Armenia
by Lilit Gevorgyan
The anti-government movement showed growing strength as thousands took
part in a demonstration on 28 February led by the runner-up in the 18
February presidential election, Raffi Hovannisian, who is refusing to
concede defeat to re-elected president Serzh Sargsyan.
On 25 February, the incumbent Serzh Sargsyan was declared by Armenia’s
Central Elections Commission as the official winner of the
presidential vote held on 18 February. According to the final results
the winner has secured 58.64% of the vote, while Raffi Hovannisian,
the leader of a relatively small Heritage party, came in the second
place with 36.75%. None of the other candidates took more than 3% of
the vote. Hovannisian has disputed the results as falsified. He has
admitted that initially the campaign was relatively free with
candidates able to express their views. But a few days before the
vote, after the government realised that the opposition candidate was
quickly gaining anti-government protest votes, Hovannisian said that
Sargsyan’s government had resorted to bribery and vote-rigging. Prior
to the vote. Hovannisian demanded that President Sargsyan be
disqualified from the race for abuse of administrative resources, but
his call was ignored.
To Hovannisian’s and his supporters’ dissatisfaction, the election
monitors from the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe
(OSCE), the main Western election watchdog, did not deliver a harsh
verdict on the election results, although the final conclusions gave
enough ammunition to challenge the vote results. The OSCE monitors
agreed that there were some instances of electrical procedural
violations, including “carousel” voting, allowing multiple voting.
This was done with the help of vanishing ink in the passports, as
reported by the OSCE. More importantly, they pointed at the lack of
real competition during the election campaign. This was due to the
pullout from the election process of the three major opposition
parties: Armenian National Congress (ANC, led by former president
Levon Ter-Petrossian); the Prosperous Armenia party of millionaire
politician Gagik Tsarukyan; and the Armenian Revolutionary Federation
(ARF).
“Barevolution”
The popular anti-government movement that emerged in the wake of 18
February has been dubbed “Barevolution”, a play on the Armenian word
“barev” (hello). Barev is not just a greeting word in Armenian; it
also implies kindness and hope, two key messages that Hovannisian has
chosen that describes his approach to change. Effectively, he is
calling for a velvet revolution that will require both the protestors
and the government to be tolerant and ready for a compromise.
His insistence on tolerance and respect for everyone, including the
policemen, represented heavily in all protests, and is something new
for a post-Soviet popular movement leader. Much like in other former
Soviet states, Armenian voters are accustomed to more aggressive and
divisive speeches by opposition politicians aiming for zero-sum
solutions and certainly not showing respect for authorities.
Hovannisian’s message, being very idealistic, has found a strong
resonance among many voters, who oppose violent clashes such as those
seen on 1 March 2008, shortly after Sargsyan’s first election. In
those clashes 10 people were killed, tainting not only Sargsyan’s
presidency but also the opposition leaders; particularly, the first
Armenian president of the third republic, Levon Ter-Petrossian, who
led the failed uprising in 2008.
On 28 February, Hovannisian held another rally in Yerevan’s iconic
Liberty Square, the birthplace of the independence movement, in which
thousands of protesters took part. It was to discuss the final results
of the 18 February presidential election and also update the
participants on the progress of the opposition talks with the
authorities on the opposition’s agenda, which increasingly looks like
a blueprint for a “velvet revolution”.
This blueprint has emerged almost on the hoof after the protests broke
out. It is a roadmap towards turning Armenia into a parliamentary
democracy from the current highly centralised presidential system. The
protest leaders demand fresh parliamentary elections, which were last
held only in May 2012; constitutional changes to pave the way for a
parliamentary republic; bringing to justice all state officials
potentially involved in vote rigging; and finally calling fresh
presidential elections.
Hovannisian has held talks with the authorities but thus far all his
proposals have been turned down. A parliamentary motion by some of the
opposition deputies to call in an extraordinary session has also been
declined by the pro-government majority. The government has offered a
few cabinet positions to Hovannisian’s Heritage party deputies, a weak
move of compromise which was expectedly declined by Heritage.
In early March Armenia’s Constitutional Court rejected Hovannisian’s
appeal to annual Sargsyan’s election as president, arguing that he
used administrative resources for his election campaign. The decision
was not unexpected, but Hovannisian decided to appeal to adhere to the
legal course of action. However, the upcoming Council of Elders
elections in May is a serious opportunity for the opposition’s roadmap
of incremental change of power. The leaders of the popular movement
have already said that they will focus on taking control of this
important council in the upcoming poll.
People versus politicians
The demonstrations are mainly aimed at the political establishment,
which has not changed significantly since the election of
Ter-Petrossian as president after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Although Ter-Petrossian stepped down in 1998 under domestic pressure
he had hand-picked his successor, Robert Kocharian, who similarly
passed on his power to the incumbent. Hence the disenchantment of
voters is directed at a political system that incorporates previous
and current administrations. Lack of economic freedom, heavy
oligarchic structure of the economy, weak courts, and corruption are
lingering issues that the demonstrators see are directly linked to the
fact that the political elite has never been overhauled regardless of
a series of elections, approved as acceptable by Western election
monitors over the past 15 years, but never enough to improve both the
political and economic situation. The state of the economy has forced
more than 700,000 Armenian citizens to leave the country in the last
two decades, a concerning figure for a country with current population
of just 3.5 million.
Over the years, despite some differences, the same political-business
elite ultimately controls the political power and economy in Armenia,
supported by oligarchs linked to these power structures..Moreover,
some of the opposition parties, including ANC and Prosperous Armenia,
are also seen by many voters as part of the ruling elite: incapable of
and uninterested in changing the current system.
The recent wave of protests does not show signs of subsiding despite
the disunity amongst the opposition parties. The rift is mainly for
two reasons.
Firstly, prior to the launch of the presidential campaign, major
opposition parties decided to opt out from the race, arguing that this
would deprive Sargsyan’s election of legitimacy. However, Hovannisian
chose to remain in the race, saying that the government would field
quasi-opposition candidates to validate Sargsyan’s election.
This created a rift among the opposition players. Furthermore, the
larger opposition parties claim that the Heritage leader, whose party
has only five seats in 131-mandate Armenian parliament, managed to
garner the protest vote which is not necessarily supporting
Hovannisian’s vision. Hence, ANC’s charismatic leader Ter-Petrossian
threw his support behind the popular movement but reserved it for
Hovannisian, arguing that the latter has yet to prove himself.
Secondly, the popular movement has revealed the new leanings of some
of the opposition politicians and their parties. Particularly,
Tsarukyan and his Prosperous Armenia party have been reserved in their
support for the movement and vocal in their opposition to fresh
parliamentary elections. Tsarukyan, who was widely tipped to challenge
Sargsyan in the 18 February election, has not made any public
appearance since the protests began. Another presidential candidate,
veteran Soviet-era dissident Paryur Hayrikyan, running against
Sargsyan in the latest race, has also decided not to back Hovannisian.
Hayrikyan, who was mysteriously shot in the shoulder days before the
vote, has since lost his already limited political currency with the
popular movement. ARF is the only party that thus far has joined
Hovannisian, although the support initially was more half-hearted than
the demonstrators in the squares would like to see.
Waiting game
The people’s movement needs to swell in numbers and galvanise the
regions to force the authorities to abandon their tactics of waiting.
The popular leaders, including some of the well-respected
intellectuals, need to create a grand coalition with ANC and
Prosperous Armenia. The latter is unlikely to join considering
Tsarukyan’s political ambitions and business interests that can become
exposed if he directly challenges the authorities.
Hovannisian could expect some support from the vast Armenian diaspora
across the world, which outnumbers Armenia’s current population. There
have already been protests abroad demanding a change to the current
system, which many believe will lead to Armenia’s slow demise. It is
the first time that diaspora Armenians have actively participated in
Armenia’s domestic affairs by staging protests and openly challenging
Sargsyan. This is because the diaspora’ makeup is also changing. Two
decades ago the diaspora mainly comprised descendants of the survivors
of the 1915 massacres by Turks, recognised by Armenia and a number of
other European countries as genocide. However, since the collapse of
the Soviet Union many Armenians have also joined these communities,
including a number of Armenian citizens, who since the mid-2000s have
been deprived of their voting rights abroad due to changes to the
Armenian election law.
Outlook and implications
Both the West and Russia are united in their indifference with regards
to the popular movement in Armenia. Sargsyan has proven to be a
flexible partner both for the West and Russia. In terms of helping
Armenia’s democratisation process, the West is limited in its
willingness to throw support behind the opposition as Armenia
geopolitically is unlikely to take a fully pro-Western course under
any government due to its problems with Azerbaijan and Turkey. Moscow
is also aware that Armenia’s security and economic woes will keep the
country in Russia’s geopolitical orbit in years to come. Russian
authorities have also been muted, as Hovannisian has insisted that he
sees Moscow as a key ally, implying that there will be limited changes
in terms of Armenia’s foreign policy should the government changes in
Yerevan. If anything Hovannisian, born in California and a graduate of
Berkeley, Tufts and Georgetown universities, could be less flexible on
a number of Western plans, including restarting the failed
Armenian-Turkish normalisation process based on 2010 protocols.
Hovannisian’s Gandhi-style movement is perhaps the only way to avoid
violence. However, repeated reports by the opposition members of
provocations to start violence by unknown men reportedly linked to the
state security agencies is worrying. Keeping calm and increasing the
numbers of protesters is the main task of the opposition leaders to
force Sargsyan to start talks in the coming weeks.