Political scientist Edward Antinyan: “The only man, who cannot win Vazgen Manukyan is Levon Ter-Petrosyan”

17/12/2007 Lilit SEYRANYAN

– Your last article was fully against Levon Ter-Petrosyan. Why? Is the reason that the chairman of the Liberal Progressive Party of Armenia (LPPA) Hovhannes Hovhannisyan is endorsing Ter-Petrosyan?

– It’s been awhile since I have been struggling to bring legality to our party. It is absurdness to conquer one of the most democratic structures of Armenia, that is our party. Moreover, according to the amended Constitution the role of the parties has been considerably increased in the process of formation of government in the country. And for me it is unacceptable that they are telling the society that they have conquered the party with honest purposes. Today Ter-Petrosyan is trying to show that 14 parties are supporting his presidential run. All he cared about is the number. That way he could make others join him. When even the unarmed eye shows that 80% of those 14 parties are functioning with serious violations of the law on parties. The list also includes our party. However, in my article in Zhamanak Yerevan newspaper I was convincing Ter-Petrosyan to join the coalition of liberal parties and head them. And all the other liberal parties, who wouldn’t wish to join, would endorse the coalition at least. This wasn’t done. And I have already said that Hovhannisyan’s unilateral decision on endorsing Ter-Petrosyan in the name of the party, is unacceptable and have even warned Ter-Petrosyan that under these circumstances his chances of victory on the presidential bid equal zero. They ignored my warning as well. I agree that Ter-Petrosyan wasn’t supposed to spend time on my articles but I find him a principled politician and don’t think that I have to cope with the current situation within our party on behalf of Ter-Petrosyan because I am no less principled than Ter-Petrosyan. I cannot ever say that I was raised by the principle, “Respect the one, who ignores you.” Therefore I will struggle against anyone, who is attempting to conquer our party because the conqueror cannot be democratic anyway. I don’t believe that. And if the partner of the conqueror is a popular person than his guilt is even more increased. Durng one of the rallies Ter-Petrosyan announced that there was time when he made serious mistaken in terms of choosing his team and asked the people to help to get rid of them. How can people help if he is making the same mistakes when forming his current team?

– Nevertheless, why are you blaming Hovhannes Hovhannisyan, who is at present next to the first resent and supporting him during his rallies.

– I blame Hovhannisyan, who hasn’t summoned a party congress since February 2006. It means that soon the second year will be completed but he still refuses to do so. And if I kept silent because he is endorsing Ter-Petrosyan it would mean that I am basing on ambiguous standards. I am against violating any laws and rules. I deny such an approach.

– As various formats are mentioned for the victory of the opposition please tell us which of the formats would be the most effective ones. For example, would it be right if Vazgen Manukyan joined Ter-Petrosyan?

– I think the issue of formats remained in the past because Ter-Petrosyan and his teammates had blamed of various crimes the ones, who refused to join them. Vice versa they are going to start the campaign with harsh attacks. But I think a winning format could be created and I am really sorry the opposition failed it. I think prior to his statement that he’s going to run Ter-Petrosyan should have come to an agreement with Vazgen Manukyan. But he missed that chance. Vazgen Manukyan could have a great impact on the opposition victory in terms of a joint run. I am sorry that our first president has spent too much time in libraries and missed the main lessons of life, which in politics the rules of “truthfulness” also do matter. During a debate with Manukyan Ter-Petrosyan will lose because he cannot bring grounds why he treated the way he treated in 1996. That’s when Manukyan had victory in the presidential elections, however Ter-Petrosyan brought up tanks against him. I have spoken about this in my article as well. Moreover, I have even advised the teammates of Ter-Petrosyan not to even state about Ter-Petrosyan’s nomination before they settle down all the issues with Manukyan. But the late meeting of Ter-Petrosyan and Manukyan was only the obvious truth about the necessity of this meting. Coming to a consent with other leaders would be considerably facilitated if they saw that Ter-Petrosyan has settled all his issues with Manukyan and if the two candidates joined each other in the race.
 
– Do you think any of the nominated candidates will withdraw his candidature on behalf of some other candidate?

– It’s not excluded but it’s not very essential because it won’t affect the election results. The governmental candidate received a privilege because Ter-Petrosyan risked and built its message on “Blackmail, blackmail till the end.” This means that the ones, who weren’t able to withstand the pressure, joined him. Another part of them was lured by the image of a winning candidate. And the ones, who didn’t join, are full of hostility. So it turned out that everybody is racing against the first president. Under these circumstances his failure is predictive.

– As a political scientist can you say who of the candidates has a better shot to win the upcoming presidential run? Will the factor of people’s participation have influence on the process?

– I have already substantiated that the governmental candidate has the best chance to win. The people’s factor is important because any of the winners must ensure that their victory is legitimate and is accepted by international structures.