When the authorities are criticized for failure of economic policy and lack of courage to implement reforms, there are people who say that the government is not the people’s enemy to do so.
Is there any prime-minister, president or political power that does not want people live well? At first glance it seems that it is not like that and political powers want their people live in good conditions because they depend on their votes. However, the situation is not that easy in Armenia. The problem is the fact that there is conflict of interests and two good things cannot be in the same box. When time for election comes, there are conflicts of private, state and party interests. The best example to show which of these interests wins in case of such conflicts of interests is the history of the past 20 years, with all elections so far.
For example, many people agree with the fact that the country cannot develop without fair elections and it doesn’t matter what reforms are made and what is reported by international organizations. Definitely the authorities are the one that understand this better than anyone else. Why were not people allowed to express their will through fair elections? We think that if the authorities really want, they can organize and conduct fair elections corresponding with all democratic standards. They fail to do this because fair elections may result in the change of power. Specifically in Armenia it is very dangerous for the authorities not only politically, but economically as well because in case of change of the power they will lose all their incomes and health. This means that private interests are prevailing over state interests. If losing elections is a vital matter and a matter of losing everything, this means that the social conditions and wealth of people will not be good. Why do people believe that the state is not doing anything to help their financial situation and even does not have any stimulus for that?
The readers of our newspaper know the articles and reports of our colleague Lusine Stepanyan. In one of those publications Lusine wrote about a family living in a dormitory. The young mother of the family was not able to pay the electricity bills (5-6,000 drams). They could not hat their place and the children were frozen, thus they had to spend most part of the day in their neighbor’s place. They were hungry and cold. Now, when that woman is offered 10,000 drams to vote for a party, can anyone blame that woman if she takes electoral bribe? This woman understands very well that if thousands of people like him do not take bribe now, there will be more opportunities to have a better country. However, even if this woman is very smart, she cannot allow her children stay hungry. The more poor and vulnerable people like her there are, the easier it will be to get votes by paying electoral bribe and be reproduced as the ruling power. In consideration of the fact that since 2008 the level of poverty has grown by 8% and reached 36%, we may assume that now it is easier for the authorities to be re-elected as one thirds of the society is potentially bribe-takers. It turns out that worsening of the social situation, even if it sounds cruel and absurd, strengthens the government’s possibilities to be reproduced. Of course there is a risk that worse conditions in social life may result in a riot. However, as we have the past experience, we know that revolutions through riots are not possible.
When we say vulnerability we don’t mean the needy and poor people only, but businesspeople as well. As we know, the government all the time repeats that they are doing their best to help businesses and even praises its improvement in the Doing Business reports. Let’s imagine that there is really a good environment in Armenia, the law is for all, there are no officials that can violate the law, businessmen and their properties are protected by the law and there is a real independent judiciary system in Armenia, and the executive body works well. For a businessman this means freedom. This means that a businessman can be free in his decisions, speak whatever he wants, support the opposition if needed, and he will not be punished for that. Do you think that the government may allow businessmen be so free in their words and decisions and will not punish them like they did with Khachatur Sukiasyan? The answer of this question can be found in the history of the past years too. This seems to be a deadlock because even there are improvements in publications and reports, in reality the country is moving back. These are not just words, but the logic shows this. There are few people that believe in the opposition. Nobody believes that the opposition is able to change anything through constitutional methods. Now there are more people that do not want to be involved in public action since the tragic events of March 1 than several years ago. The authorities will not change either because instead of finding their own mistakes they are trying to justify their actions and they have more reasons not to be changed. The weakest point of the government is not the macroeconomic situation that is being criticized but the lack of trust to them. Even the pre-election slogan of the ROA shows that now the government is paying more attention to the trust of people. However, they have not taken into consideration the fact that after being in power for many years first of all they have to change so that people may believe in them. The most optimistic pro-government loyalists say that the government will make reforms, change the situation, enjoy the trust of people and before the end of their tenure will make sure normal elections are organized. However, this contains a risk that hardly may the government agree to take. But if we look at their commitments, they have already taken a great risk promising that they will hold free and fair elections. This means that we are dealing either with masochism or lie. There is no other option.