Political environment overview before the upcoming elections

06/04/2007 Rafael TEYMURAZYAN

The current discussion held by the “Pressing” club adjacent to “168 Hours” newspaper is dedicated to the topic of the upcoming elections and the political environment before the elections. The discussion was conducted by Armen Baghdasaryan, deputy to the editor-in-chief, who asked several important questions, such as why the opposition and the governmental parties did not unite before the elections.

“The problem is not whose fault it was, but why they failed to unite, what the purpose was and whether by doing so they don’t allow any opportunities for the voter to make a conscious choice… Voters are confused. For instance, many of my friends often ask me for advice about whom to vote for; some of them say that they advocate the opposition and some of them – the government, but they don’t know which parties to elect”, explained Armen Baghdasaryan.

Samvel Nikoyan, member of the ARP faction, started the discussion and said that the difference between the opposition and government powers is not so important before the elections since he thinks that from the theoretical point of view to be a government party means to have a majority in the parliament and participate in the formation of the government. As for the opposition, he thinks that from the theoretical point of view, it consists of the political powers that are represented in the parliament, but don’t have a part in the formation of the government. “Who said that the coalition powers don’t compete between each other during elections? For instance, ARF and PPA are competitors for ARP. All of those powers are becoming competitors before elections. Why didn’t they unite? Generally it is up to them to decide how to participate in the elections and what to do” said Nikoyan. He also says that the experience of the previous elections witnesses the fact that pre-election blocs are not effective. “In that framework it is normal that the political powers that think they are strong are competing in the elections alone and I think this is very good. The same thing concerns both the governmental and the oppositional powers. If a party is confident and they think are strong enough to compete, why should they make blocs with other powers if they may be criticized by them or let down in the future?” said Nikoyan. Baghdasaryan said that on election day the voter will go to the polling station, will be given a list that contains 28 names of government and opposition parties and will be faced with a very difficult choice and will not be able to make a good decision. To this note Nikoyan answered, “I don’t think all of them will register. What is the procedure? Parties have to follow the law, which had some problems in the Constitutional court as parties are dissolved if they don’t provide the necessary level of vote limits. This was the only way they could do this, and thus they were trying to make blocs and unite. Due to this there weren’t so many separate parties, and it was easier for the voter to chose. But this number of parties really makes it different for the voter to vote, however, this is the reality. Maybe we need dozens of years to stabilize our political field so that we can make just several sustainable blocs and make it easier for the voter to vote. But now this is what we have”.

Grigor Harutyunyan, secretary of “Justice” faction and member of APP, brought other examples. He says that when they formed a bloc with other parties people often approached them and told that they would like to vote for them but in reality they didn’t want to do so as there were other parties as well that they disliked. Harutyunyan thinks that it doesn’t make much difference whether the opposition is united during the elections or is participating separately. “Cooperation does not mean only making a joint bloc and one list. The real cooperation may happen only if the real opposition powers argue the government should resign since we believe the way they formed this government was illegal and they are illegal,” said Grigor Harutyunyan. The “Justice” faction secretary believes that the opposition constituency will concentrate on 3-4 political powers mainly. He also said that the opposition didn’t have many opportunities to act. Harutyunyan also reminded that when he was running in 2003 no one could go to Meghri, where he is originally from, and “attach posters on shops because the native people would close those shops the next day and make them leave from there.”

Concerning Armen Baghdasaryan’s questions the head of “Democratic Fatherland” party, representative of “impeachment” bloc Petros Makeyan, said that the administration is concentrated and “governed by one center”. “Not only the government is united, but also the opposition, which includes several groups of parties that are controlled by one centre too. The purpose is the following: divide and govern. As it is usually done in life too, they divide the place by different shares (20 places, 0,5, 1, 3 for each) and at the end they have 30%, which is divided between two “giants” said P. Makeyan. He thinks that Armenia will never have free and fair elections. He says that elections are important and decisive in political systems, but the existing political system “is being totally dissolved in Armenia, as it is the only way the existing regime may survive. The reason the opposition should unite is to prevent the existence of this regime. This is the only way the opposition and people may unite and beat this regime” thinks P. Makeyan. He says that this is a show for the society to demonstrate to the international community so that they have real grounds to “paint figures” in the future. He also tried to explain that the political system had collapsed. “Thirteen parties participated in the elections in 1995, 21 parties in 1999 and now – 27 parties. This process tends to collapse the political system. I believe that the opposition has an opportunity to struggle and there is still time for that. As for the opposition parties that hope to get some votes, they hope that “some votes will be painted” for them as well. I am sorry for this assumption, but this is really absurd” said P. Makeyan. G. Harutyunyan said “Rule of Law” had some commission heads in the electoral commission, but the authorities were slowly taking them out of those places too. “They are taking them out. Is it a political will to organize free and fair elections? This is done to imitate to the voter that they will try to paint figures,” added G. Harutyunyan. Makeyan says that this is a trick by the authorities to imitate that LS is opposition. “They can easily intimidate or just pay the secretary; they don’t have any problems with it. This is done to disorient the society. The LS has been playing with people since 1998 and they are doing the same thing now too,” said Makeyan. If they are right, if the authorities are dissolving the political system, it means that the opposition is a part of them too, as by failing to unite they don’t prevent that process and scenario. What about the representatives of the opposition? Do they think so?

Member of “Republic” party board Suren Surenyants agrees with Petros Makeyan. Surenyants says that if we lived in a democratic country, people would not worry about the fact of whether the opposition is united or not. Surenyants thinks that the institution of elections does not exist in Armenia and the political field has been dissolved and degraded. He says that the fact that the opposition has failed to unite is bad first of all for them, and it divides them, that even some of them have lost hope and have decided to become a part of the existing system, i.e. participate in the elections with their specific slogans and techniques. “Due to this separation some powers are trying to exclude this system. The problem is not only change of the authority. The authority is one of the attributes only. The society can estimate the attributes itself,” he said. As for the second reason why the opposition failed to unite, he thinks it is the lack of an adequate political culture. According to him, the opposition tends to separation. “During these two months the parties will discover their appearances and it will be clear for which of them the mandate is a tool and for which – a goal,” he said. Concerning Nikoyan’s view that before elections the relationship of the opposition and the government becomes comparative is true only for the countries that don’t use administrative resources, where the parliament is a political institution, which is not what we have in Armenia. Surenyants says that experience has shown that it is impossible to attach even posters on small boutiques because they have problems with the taxation department later. He also said that he thought “Prosperous Armenia” and ARP are managed by one center and the PA was founded to disorient people.

Armen Baghdasaryan asked PA member Vardan Bostanjyan to clarify that issue. “Was the PA founded to disorient people and are the ARP and PA managed by the same center?” asked A. Baghdasaryan. Bostanjyan said that each normal citizen should help his or her country. “Everything in our life is incubated, is not very concrete and has its dynamics. What do you want? Do you want to see strong scientists, musicians and others in Armenia? Now we are in the process of development. Now we are in the phase of transformation from “trampled” ideologies, from centralized regime to liberal relationships,” said Bostanjyan.  A natural process is taking place and it is a complicated process,” mentioned V. Bostanjyan and, referring to the benevolent acts of the “Prosperous Armenia” political party, added that “if your country still welcomes the institute of benevolency, then you can still carry out that activity”.

“But should that be used for political motives? Should television be used for advertisement?” asked S. Surenyants. In response to Surenyants’s question, Bosotanjyan said the following:

“Well, do you know what? It is like you can’t be an “elephant in the jungle””.

According to V. Bostanjyan, non-preferable manifestations are possible in any case, but we can’t compare them and think that something is not right in the country in all cases.

“If it’s not like that, then it’s a process. All developed worlds have developed by that process for centuries. Are you fighting for one billboard?” asked the “Prosperous Armenia” representative and continued in an intricate language, biting at the Armenian Popular Party: “When we are doing something together, I won’t get up at the most difficult point and say, for example, I want to drink a cup of tea, do you understand? Well, go ahead and drink your tea until there will be somebody man enough to govern the country”.

Armenian Popular Party representative Ruzan Khachatryan replied:

“Mr. Bostanjyan, you tell us “why do you want everyone to become the “violinist”, or the one setting the tunes? On the contrary, we don’t want to. We want the violinist to play the violin, the political activist to be in politics”…Getting back to the topic on booklets, Nikoyan proposed to the oppositionists present to hang those “booklets” from their “balconies”.

Leader of the “Christian-Popular Rebirth” political party Sos Gimishyan noted in his speech that V. Bostanjyan gave a good interpretation of the situation of Armenia using the words “jungle and all”.

He is also of the opinion that although the authorities are not going to the elections together, however they are not ruling from the same position. “The government has different structures in the oppositional field as well and it relies on those structures. This is normal. It is very bad that the opposition did not unite; there is no political process. The government is not to blame for that, rather it is the quality of the opposition. Robert Kocharyan could care less if the opposition united; unite, if you can. They say that Robert Kocharyan corrupted the political field. If the political field is not spoilt, how can it be corrupted? If it is, then it’s good that it is corrupted. The political field includes activists who are not steadfast. We can even praise Kocharyan for revealing the spoilt oppositionists”. “Prosperous Armenia” representative V. Bostanjyan interrupted Gimishyan saying that “Gimishyan has not made any negative comment in his life; he only says good things”. However, after hearing Bostanjyan’s “compliments”, Sos Gimishyan realized that people might misinterpret him. So, he made a remark to V. Bostanjyan. “I don’t accept these authorities. I think the sooner these authorities leave the better”.

Leader of the Armenian Christian Democratic Union Khosrov Harutyunyan was also participating in the debate and believes that Armenians are currently witnessing the natural progression of the enlargement of the political system. When saying “influential party”, we don’t understand a concise ideology; we don’t understand the approaches to public administration that may be beneficial in the long-run.

“Somebody mentioned about parties uniting. I think what we have witnessed is also very objective. As a citizen, I want to understand what the difference must be between the authority majority and the oppositional majority. The difference is probably in the concepts of public life,” mentioned Kh. Harutyunyan, noting that for years, Armenians have not seen a debate between the pro-government and opposition majority representatives in different fields of public life, for example, the education sector, cultre, politics, etc. According to Khosrov Harutyunyan, you get the impression that the authorities and the opposition differ when it comes to only one issue, that is, power.

“If one is the power holder and the other is not, then the latter moves to the oppositional field. If there is one thing that the authorities and the opposition have to share it is power. I think that we are narrowing the political field here. I ask myself: why did the opposition have to unite? Did it have to unite to coordinate its political quality and political potential? If we look at it from that perspective, then I am certain that the political forces would be able to provide themselves with the chance to coordinate. But that was not the case. So, coming to power ends in itself,” said Kh. Harutyunyan. He believes that it is time to talk about the ideologies of the political parties. Ruzan Khachatryan remarked that she would agree with Kh. Harutyunyan if it were possible to apply theory to real life. Harutyunyan agreed with her, adding that if Armenians try not to turn theory into reality, then they will have less chances of succeeding. He also proposed that political parties let the public know about their future governmental bodies before going to the elections because that would also help voters.

“Unfortunately, we have disqualified politics and have made it lose meaning,” stated Kh. Harutyunyan.

Here is where representative of the “Armenian Liberal Progressive Party” Edward Antinyan stepped in. He first asked why the opposition wasn’t able to come to power back in 2003. According to Antinyan, the opposition saw that it would be naive to hope for the support of the international community while playing in the Russian “field” and they set a plan according to which the ALPP sees Armenia’s future in the European Union and NATO. Antinyan believes that if the opposition has not succeeded in the “pre-electoral change of power”, then the only chance it has is during the post-election developments.

“You must first go to the elections so that you can then protest in the square if you are sure that they are going to commit fraud,” he mentioned and brought up the example of Georgia. According to Antinyan, as the maximal element, the oppositionists think that there were very few people with the Western values in 2003 and ask why they should enter politics with few votes? That is why, according to him, everybody “played in the Russian field”.

S. Nikoyan interrupted the debate and mentioned that it is not necessary to blame one person for the deterioration of the political field.

“We mustn’t think that there is somebody ruining the political field. I must say that if there really is someone who is able to do that on his own, then long live that person,” he said. “Long live Stalin,” said Ruzan Khachatryan. “Long live Stalin, if he were to be able to do that much,” answered Nikoyan. According to the latter, we can always blame someone, curse him and leave, however the ambitions of the oppositional political parties are the reason for the decline of political parties.

S. Gimishyan got back to Harutyunyan words mentioning that he agrees in general, but that he also meets with people and the only question on their minds is “Is there hope for a change in the country?”

“That is the only question on their minds. If I talk to them about educational programs during my pre-electoral campaign, they will say that I am stupid, crazy. They will say ‘What are you talking about? What education, what ideology…?’ Everyone asks whether there is hope for the opposition to unite in order to get rid of these authorities,” said Gimishyan. According to politician Levon Zurabyan, there is no honest, political struggle in Armenia. He is of the opinion that the struggle of the opposition is similar to the battle between emperor Comodus and half-defeated Maximus.

“Today the authorities are starting that kind of a struggle with the opposition. They first kill, or wait until the opponent is half-defeated, then they struggle. Then they blame the opposition for not getting into a deserving struggle,” he continued.

According to L. Zurabyan, the legal mechanism of funding for the opposition is eliminated in Armenia; the entire flow of political funding is under the control of the authorities and it is only directed towards those parties that serve the authorities, television is under the full control of the presidential residency.

“They calculate who deserves how much. They decide who must come to what debate…They make it so that any oppositionist who has something to say to convince the public doesn’t appear on television. They bring the weakest and crush them. The next thing is electoral bribe. It is nonsensical to talk about the opposition uniting, doing this or that. The opposition does not have a field to maneuver at all. The authorities are playing a very dirty game; they are leading a bad struggle. But this is a very naive game because no matter what, they can’t kid the international community. The international community will not be fooled and that will hurt Armenia’s image, its positions, including the Karabagh conflict, which is the most important issue,” said L. Zurabyan.

Surenyants was trying to find out the ideological system of values the authorities possessed to have the opposition be against it.

“Let’s reinstate constitutional order in the country and then a new debating field will open,” he proposed.

Edward Antinyan summed up the debate by disagreeing with the thought that unity is not in the interest of strong political parties. According to him, there are general rules of coexistence, general interests for which each person cedes a little bit of his independence, but in the end lives in a system that is not that bad, say, as the European Union.