Anyway, I’m not sure the Armenian military would be ready to downsize the military even with the argument that a smaller better equipped force is more effective than a larger conscript-driven one when the conflict over Karabakh still remains unresolved. This is especially true given sky-rocketing military expenditure and threats of renewed fighting made in Azerbaijan.

It would certainly mean that Russian troops would have to be gone from Armenia, and I just don’t see that happening anytime soon, especially with Karabakh unresolved. Sure, the Russian border guards control the Turkish and Iranian borders and not the one with Azerbaijan, but without them I just think the military here would be overstretched and they’d have to be gone before NATO membership and not after.

Anyway, all hypothetical, I suppose. Let’s see what the future will hold in store. Probably it will surprise us both.

The only thing I would like to focus is the Karabakh issue. I reckon, that it will not stop us from joining a NATO.
Perhaps there will be some change in format of peace talks, and control will be switched from OSCE Minsk Group to NATO, but I think that Karabakh issue is not a problem, that may hurt NATO cooperation.

Anyway, some points I’m not too sure of, and namely that the oligarchs would relinquish their positions so easily. Actually, I’ve always wondered if we wouldn’t see a situation emerge when the president ultimately has to engage in direct battle with them. Still, I suppose it’s possible when you consider that many in government are directly linked to the oligarchs and some actually are the same people so some kind of deal could be reached, I suppose.

Regarding Diaspora, I’m not so sure that this is the blessing you hope it might be. To date, Diasporan investments have been minimal when compared to foreign investment in other countries, and the parallel with Ireland has been raised in this regard. That is, economic growth did not come from the Irish Diaspora investing in the country, but foreign investors. Ultimately, an investor puts their money into countries where they can make a profit and the laws of economics don’t change on the basis of your ethnic origin.

Anyway, all the other points worth pondering, although I can’t see any Armenian leader advocating NATO membership just yet and I’m not sure we’re going to see Russian troops out of Armenia in the near future either. Genocide recognition might go some way to easing tensions between Armenia and Turkey, but it might also go the other way with the Turks reacting very harshly to any recognition in the U.S. Anyway, I guess you recognize that NATO membership is going to be a long way off — another 15-20 years I would guess even if the process started today.

It also presuppose that Armenia and Azerbaijan resolve the conflict over Karabakh, I suppose given that NATO favors smaller better-equipped and a more professional army which is something I’m not sure the military would go for while still in a state of hostilities with Azerbaijan. I’m also not entirely convinced that Russia would allow this to happen either, and most of the economy is still in the hands of them, and most of the Diasporan investment here is from Russian-Armenians presumably with close ties to Putin.

Anyway, that these things could happen is possible although by no means overnight. However, they do fit in with the general policy of integrating with Europe and other structures and a form of managed democracy would be necessary to achieve them. However, I’m still not sure what Serzh is up to. I mean, either he’s willing to let someone else be president and remain prime minister — as you say, more power is afforded to the PM and the NA which Serzh controls, so I’m unsure what Kocharian would do in this scenario.

I mean, we don’t think he’s going to leave the political arena so what position would he take up? Becoming Prime Minister would pretty much see a continuation of his power, but I just can’t see Serzh not becoming president in that situation unless there really is a lot of trust between the two of them. Of course, as long as Serzh can retain control of the Republican Party I suppose it’s not much of an issue, but again, it’s a matter of trust — something we don’t have a lot of in the political field of Armenia.

Still, I suppose we’ll understand more as the election draw ever closer. In the meantime, we have a lot to think on so thanks for your comments and opinion. A lot of what you say could conceivably happen, but my issue would be time. That said, perhaps I’m forgetting the obvious. Nobody is expecting anything to happen overnight. It will be more evolved and 15 years is not a long time in the history of a nation. Let’s face it, it’s already been 16 years since independence was declared so another decade or two is nothing in the scheme of things.

I’m guessing that this is also what the West believes as long as Armenia continues to play the right game.

It may be even Raffi Hovhannisyan (but for me it is more of a science fiction, than a reality). I think that it is the policy of good guy/bad guy opposition. While society is waiting for the worst (Serge Sargsyan) it may become really happy and fully supportive with some kind of compromise with much more cleaner candidate. Do not forget new constitution: prime minister have much more domestic power, than a president.

Does this mean that we might actually see broad based support for Oskanian if he were to run?

I think yes.

However, does this mean that Serzh is also willing to see this happen as long as he remains prime minister, and what would this mean for Kocharian or would he simply remain behind the scenes?

I cannot say anything for Serzh. He’s on his own, and I’m not a Nostradamus, to predict anything. I’m just sharing my thoughts - nothing more. I think, that there will be some attempts to make Serzh a winning candidate. And I think, that West will block this the same way it blocked Vazgen Sargsyan from presidency.

And please do not forget - perhaps I’m completely wrong.

There’s one more interesting parallel - in both Armenia (1999) and georgia (2005) there was a murder of a people standing very close to new leaders. Something like this was tried in Ukraine on Yushenko.

And if in Armenia this killings had opposite effect (people close to HHSh tend to believe and widely spreading information, that October 27th was inspired or controlled by Russian security forces) - in Georgia and Ukraine this murders or attempt to murder has brought newly elected leaders into a status of western puppets.

So enough for that, I’m sure, that you may find additional parallels, if you would like to think in this direction.

As for presidency run:

1. When people speak about the Serge Sargsian’s
candidacy it creates a big seizure for a lot of people (including me). And in this case I’m pretty sure that it is quite impossible to control a clear election. Even with quality standards that allow voters bribery.

2. Armenia has completely used and already emptied all the possible fruits of cooperation with Russia. And it is a time for a switch. Everybody understands it. All we need is some positive sign from the west. There is clear evidence of such small, but very effective messages: Perina’s appointment and Hoagland dismissal. The next step is Genocide resolution and State Department is preparing comfortable position for after-the-resolution times, by appointing in Armenia people that are well-accepted in Armenia. The only thing may be done as a payoff for this - is somebody, who will be very pro-western. Preferrably diasporan.

3. Armenia needs to make a use from diaspora. It is clearly stated and fully understood, that Diaspora potential is Armenian oil. And if you will try to remember LTP’s conflict with diaspora, and Kocharyan “reconciliation” you will find the answer. Kocharyan made his policy of building successful economic state with a lot of local rich people. The next president have to put local oligarchs and outer oligarchs to compete for/in Armenia. Entrance of foreign armenian capital solves all the questions of military security.
And the only warrant for this developments is the president with diasporan background.

4. When we speak about the military security of Armenia we have to cover only one topic. It is Genocide. Nothing more. If there will be Genocide pressure on Turkey be sure we can even remove border guards - there will be no danger from Turkey anymore. And this is the best occasion to join NATO, because the only concern of joining NATO is Turkey’s experience attacking NATO member, in violation of article 5.

Diclaimer
Anyway - all things I’ve written must be considered as intellectual exercise, and my personal view of what is good, and what would I like to see in Armenia. Nothing more

BTW: Uzogh, I want to include your comment from the previous post here as well because I also think it’s relevant to this one and certainly very interesting. Actually, it was your comment to me during the parliamentary election about Oskanian’s possible candidacy that makes me consider this variant more, especially as some politicians such as Victor Dallakian and Stepan Safarian are also of the same mind.

I am one of those who is sure, that Serge Sargsian will not become the next president of Armenia.
Perhaps it’s a kind of wishful thinking practice, but I’m quite sure, that there will be West-backed candidate from ruling elite.

Everybody understands that it is too late to begin any orange process here in Armenia, but there are interesting things, that I want you to focus on.
1. There will be exit polls sponsored by west. And the credibility of an organization doing this exit polls is out of question even for me.
2. There are some interesting tendencies, in US policy in region and particularly in Armenia: Perina’s appointment, close Genocide voting in Congress, Turkish elections. I think that all the developments in 2007 are showing that there’s some agreement between Yerevan and Washington. But I cannot imagine about the deeps roots of it - is it Iran, Karabakh issue, election, Iraq, Turkey or any mix of those.
3. The most important of them IMHO is Genocide bill. And positive resolution on it will bring to a full redraw of US policy in region.

And in this case - West vitally needs western oriented strong president in Armenia. And I think that it is Vartan Oskanyan.

Anyway, so what do you think? That Kocharian and the ARF-D will push and support Oskanian’s candidacy in the 2008 presidential election? Actually, this is very interesting given the inability of the opposition to unite behind one of their own, and also because many civil society activists will do almost anything to prevent Serzh from becoming president.

Does this mean that we might actually see broad based support for Oskanian if he were to run? Certainly, he is perceived to be cleaner than others such as David Harutyunyan so it might be the only person from the government camp who could conceivably gain the support of even opposition supporters (voting tactically) and the international community who want continuity, especially in the area of Karabakh and European Integration.

However, does this mean that Serzh is also willing to see this happen as long as he remains prime minister, and what would this mean for Kocharian or would he simply remain behind the scenes? I’m also interested in who will be conducting the exit polls? IRI, NDI, or someone else, and is this 100 percent for sure?

Representing a western-influenced viewpoint, Giragosian says the US has learnt a clear lesson from organizing the flower and color (“Rose” in Georgia; and “Orange” in Ukraine) revolutions in some CIS republics and concludes that imposed democracies do not work in countries where there are no truly democratic oppositions.

With too many other hot spots of unrest or tension – from North Korea to Darfur – the west, says the veteran analyst, welcomes stability.

“The process of importing American democracy has exhausted itself. Today both the US and Russia want to maintain stability in Armenia and the CIS. That context would suggest the US should endorse Serge Sargsyan’s candidacy for Kocharyan’s succession, because Sargsyan will be able to continue the current political and economic path,” Giragosian says.

[…]

The news on the possible nomination of the Minister of Foreign Affairs Vartan Oskanian was largely circulated particularly in September.

“In an interview Oskanian neither denied nor confirmed the fact, which, I believe, was a message to Serge Sargsyan sent by the president’s order,” says the head of the analytical department at the Center for National and International Studies, analyst Stepan Safaryan.

Oskanian, who at last month’s Armenia-Diaspora Conference presented a program for saving rural areas, was actually giving an early campaign speech, Safaryan contends.

Safaryan believes the authorities have a series of the minimum and the maximum plans prepared for a variety of situations.

“The best scenario (for the political elite) will be the following: to exploit the Karabakh problem as a means of putting the West on the false front to get a carte-blanche and to prolong the stay in power either by taking up the chair of the prime minister (the version that Kocharyan may take up the chair of the prime is already circulating), or to hand the power to a preferred successor,” says Safaryan.

[…]

He says the best scenario for Kocharyan will be if he gets a weak president, whom he can control from the sidelines; in the worst case Kocharyan will have to leave and hand the power over to someone else.

“Davit Harutyunyan or Vartan Oskanian could fit to the role of a weak president. They are frequently named. For the moment at least, Serge Sargsyan does not correspond to this scenario and if Kocharyan is forced to leave the power, he will have to accept Sargsyan’s victory,” says Safaryan.

[…]

According to Safaryan the authorities have a ready scenario also for the case of unpredictable commotion within the society. In case of a boycott, oppositional Artur Baghdasaryan, still connected with the presidential administration Safaryan claims, will be elected.

Giragosian says neither society nor observers should expect significant change because the system is tightly closed and the opposition is: ““an elite, and would be simply like new bandits in power with just a different face.”

Giragosian says also Oskanian’s aspirations are not attainable.

“At first sight Oskanian seems an experienced politician who has been in power elites for years. But in fact he has been isolated and the sphere of his activities has been limited. There are some positive sides in this, however, because keeping him aloof from the decision-making by the elite has helped him to be more unsullied. But you never know if one is able to be a good president regardless of whether he is unsullied. Being ‘clean’ is not enough,” says Giragosian.

Nor, Giragosian adds, is Armenia ready to have an unscathed leader yet.

“It’s Armenia, not Oskanian, which is not ready. For the time being perhaps Armenia needs someone like Putin – with some dictatorial way of rule and the ability to eradicate corruption and the constantly increasing criminalization in the country.”

Well, I still don’t buy into the idea of the Georgian Rose Revolution being manufactured from outside, but for sure international interest and involvement in that event was crucial. Anyway, food for thought.