In 1999 I decided not to endorse any political powers any more. However, after the 2003 election and the events in 2004 I decided to endorse those who were fair and go against the official abuse. What was the difference between the presidential election 2008 and the “Armenian elections” of 1995?
In 1995 it was clear that the government stuck to the slogan “either death or the power”. Even though each time before elections the authorities are promising to organize free and fair elections, and the opposition is assuring that they will protect their votes by all means, as a result always there are violations, intimidation, cynicism and disappointment on the part of people.
When in 2007 rumors were spread about the possible nomination of Ter-Petrosyan during the presidential election, on the one hand people were curious and waiting with interest, on the other hand they were worried. When a friend was trying to convince me to endorse Ter-Petrosyan (as they had convinced many people) I asked several questions concerning the elections of 1996, Vazgen Sargsyan, the violence done by Vano Siradeghyan and allegations of a series of murders in the 90s. After debating for some time he said, “You are not a politician; you are looking at things from the moral point of view”.
I decided to attend Ter-Petrosyan’s rallies just for interest hoping that he would have changed during these years. However, I didn’t see any regret besides his decision to bring Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan to Yerevan (because he had been removed by common efforts with Vazgen Sargsyan).
When talking to Ter-Petrosyan’s supporters I mainly said that I was against Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan because of the fact that during their office the Noyan Tapan and A1+ TV companies were shut down, the Constitutional referendum 2005 was falsified, the elections in 1998 and 2003 were falsified as well, H. Khachatryan, P. Poghosyan, K. Demirchyan, V. Sargsyan and others were killed, the police is torturing people and political detainees.
In contrast, I am endorsing Ter-Petrosyan despite the fact that in his office the Yerkir, Azatamart, Urbat newspapers were closed down, the editorial of the Golos was fired, and the H1 national channel broadcasted the Passians and Zhamanakachap programs, they falsified the referendum of 1995, the election of 1996, and Sukiasyan, Ghandilyan, Yuzbashyan, V. Petrosyan, H. Galstyan and others were killed.
We can bring more facts.
They are advising us to forget the 1995-96. If yes, let’s forget the 1915, 1937 and 1999 as well.
Some people say that he has changed. They are doing like a woman who thinks that her lover will get divorced and marry her even if he hasn’t said that he would.
Ter-Petrosyan’s campaign was totally different than the other campaigns so far.
First, the media’s behavior was totally different.
It is not a secret that most of the media companies are controlled by the government and are serving for their unilateral campaign purposes. This time a number of allegedly independent newspapers became a campaign tool for Ter-Petrosyan and the editors of such newspapers were directly involved in that candidate’s campaign. In fact there was no unbiased coverage. Both the sides were developing their lie. The Exit Poll results, which have been ordered by the authorities, claimed that Serzh Sargsyan had 58% of the votes, and one of the opposition newspapers wrote that according to the preliminary information Levon Ter-Petrosyan had won. The opposition media wrote concerning the incidents in Talin city that citizen of that city named Sako had been beaten by his son (even if it is true, there is no reason to praise him).
There were also some good things and they met with the LS, ARF, NU, NDU party leaders to agree on excluding black PR from their campaign and not to slash each other.
Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s goal was to take the first place within the opposition, which would enable him fight against the potential fraud and violations. They understood that it would be difficult to “grip” the votes of the authorities and they tried to get the votes of the opposition. The most important goal was taking the second place notwithstanding the number of the votes and the decision of the Constitutional Court because the next action would be taking the power under the slogan of fairness.
They acted in accordance with the following principle: “the result justifies the means”. Firstly, they created an image of the authorities and Karabakhi people (or as how they said the “Albanians”) involved being enemies. Those candidates, who did not join Levon Ter-Petrosyan being the joint candidate, were called fascists, traitors, etc. If those newspapers were circulated in the hands of about 1000 citizens, the answers to such critics was heard in the entire territory of the country on the air of the H1 national TV channel.
The ARF was not criticized since the end of the campaign period. However, a couple of days ago the Haykakan Zhamanak newspaper published some documents concerning the Dro case. The ARF criticized Ter-Petrosyan as well. Ter-Petrosyan’s supporters were expecting that and started spreading rumors that everyone was supporting Serzh Sargsyan and voting for anyone other than Ter-Petrosyan would mean giving the votes to Serzh Sargsyan. The TV monitoring shows that the media activities have been unilateral as well (everyone is against Ter-Petrosyan). The next step consists in organizing an attack by the intelligentsia.
On January 26 the Haykakan Zhamanak newspaper wrote that everyone who was not in the square was supporting Kocharyan and was a traitor. Later they called the people who were not with them during the demonstrations as scoundrels, traitors, etc. Thus the people who have oppositional viewpoints were encouraged to participate in their rallies.
I think that the struggle of the society in fact was not against Levon Ter-Petrosyan, Robert Kocharyan and Serzh Sargsyan, but against the system which has been created and strengthened by Surik Khachatryan, general Manvel Grigoryan, general Seyran Ohanyan and others. And also one day Hakob Hakobyan said that he was encouraged to take part in those events and joined the rallies. Once I was walking near the place of the demonstrations and I heard people repeating the name of Manvel, I stopped and walked back. What are we struggling against? In fact the same system was fighting against itself, or, as one of my friends said, Levon Ter-Petrosyan was fighting against Levon Ter-Petrosyan. The proof is also the fact that both parties are citing the speeches of Vazgen Sargsyan for campaign purposes. Furthermore, on the election day both parties distributed bribes (the opposition did it in the center of Yerevan and in Lori region) and made violations (the opposition did it in Gegharkunik region).
I can’t understand where the fairness is. Many of Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s undiscovered supporters said that they were participating in the demonstration not to help Ter-Petrosyan, but fairness. I don’t believe it. During the rallies they said ideas such as “I have received more than 65% of votes”, “I will go to the president’s office on your hands”, which means that it is a classic competition for power, but not for fairness.
When I hear such things from my relatives who are Ter-Petrosyan’s supporters, I smile and say that in order to struggle against immoral things you should do immoral things as well.
It is an established fact that sometimes politicians are doing immoral things and they are trying to hide their inner maneuvers not to show them to the society because the society respects morality. Our society is politicized at a high level from the bad point of view; it is thinking of the political activities and ignoring the moral side of the coin (this idea is also proven by expressions such as “we can understand that the authorities can embezzle, but not so much”, “he is keeping his family very well”, “these ones are embezzling more”, etc.).
Despite the previous elections this time the unwritten slogans of the opposition were the same, which consisted in the understanding of “either death or the power”. All the bridges had been burnt and it was a fight for survival. The possible winner would annihilate the loser. The opposition had started to announce the list of the scoundrels and the betrayers as they said.
Many people were sure that there would be clashes resulting in victims. We wander whether the opposition thought that there could be victims. I believe it did because in the past Vano Siradeghyan said that “there can be even 700-800 victims in order to keep the power”. The opposition knows the character of the authorities very well as they are alike.
Could the opposition and the authorities escape from such clashes and victims? I think they could. After dispersing the strike through unacceptable power the authorities would be better not to allow new strikes take place, and the opposition, in order not to have victims, had to disperse the strike because it is not worthy having even one victim for the purpose of keeping or getting the power. However, the apparent political disobedience grew in riot. I have an impression that it is in the interests of some governmental powers and also the opposition to have victims in order to accuse each other in the blame.
As always the authorities win, thus the repressive apparatus was used and again there were political detainees and terror. Furthermore, we did a huge step back from democracy after the adoption of the new law on rallies.
As for the other opposition powers, they found some political (help this country) and moral explanations (Ter-Petrosyan has insulted everyone) and joined the coalition powers, thus leaving Levon Ter-Petrosyan alone in the desert.
I think that cooperation is needed in this situation, but only through agreeing upon political principles, but not through giving high positions.
In a big picture, the victim is neither the government nor the opposition. The victim is the society. Is the saying that “each society deserves its leader” true? I think that partly it is true. For example, in Germany there have been fascism, later communism and in parallel with it democracy. Which of the abovementioned did the German society deserve? It is worth mentioning that the Germans had different ideological flows and each of them who came to power led the society in the direction determined by them. I think that our society is able only to look for a good thing or the worse from the bad options, or a slave owner (let them think about the people a little more). This fact is proven by the total number of the votes given to the former authorities (which have proven that they are not democratic). I would lake to ask a question to our society: how many votes would Vladimir Putin get if nominated in Armenia? I think that he would get more votes than Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s and Serzh Sargsyan’s votes taken together (Where is the freedom? Where is the independence?).
In difference with the last election the society is now disappointed and has lost its hope, furthermore it is divided and is full of anger. By the way, the pro-opposition part of the society is divided as well.
The part of the society which does not like the authorities is divided into two parts consisting of two groups, one of which endorses Ter-Petrosyan and the other one is strictly against him. The first ones are fanatic and are accusing the others in supporting Serzh Sargsyan and in other sins. There is enmity in people, friends and homes.
Now it is not about being brave in order to be able to go against the authorities, but people need to be brave enough to speak the truth and go against not only the authorities, but also Levon’s stream.
This situation reminds the situation in Armenia in 1918-20, when during three years the authorities were spoilt through such falsifications, instead of the “Yerkrapahs” there were “mauserists”, after which there was a riot in May. The weakened system affected the state, which was followed by the developments of Kars and we lost the republic.
Is there any solution for this situation? I think yes. First of all the authorities have to make the initial steps; set the political detainees free and stop the intimidation. The opposition should make some steps too and freeze the revolutionary activities, enter into a dialogue on the future political activities and demand independence of speech, independent judicial system, extraordinary elections.
However, I think that neither of the parties wants to do such things to help the situation. The authorities have won, and the opposition will “win”. Neither of the parties wants to compromise in order to be able to blame each other of the failures, even if this compromise concerns new victims, Karabakh or the state.
P.S. Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s movement reminds about the 1988 with its level of intolerance, and I have seen myself in that stream as well…