Notes from the Election Blogosphere

Now that — for the time being, at least — next year’s presidential election in Armenia looks set to be a two horse race, it has been interesting to note that even if the political scene in the country leaves much to be desired, there is at least some discussion taking place. Whether it is local Armenians on the streets to ethnic Armenians from the Diaspora living inside or outside the republic, such discussion emerges from one event more than any other — the return of Levon Ter Petrosian and and his nomination for the presidential election next year.

Talk is especially prolific among local Armenians now living abroad, and after Artmika’s post along the same lines in September, comes the Armenian Libertarian-Socialist Movement — a small group of anarchist Armenians who are against the system in place not only here in Armenia, but pretty much everywhere. This is especially relevant given that critics of Ter Petrosian argue that the system which has seen corruption skyrocket and democratization nose-dive was devised during his rule. The falsified election of 1996 specifically comes to mind.

Bonaparte is back. And suddenly there is a lot of hype about Levon Ter-Petrossyan’s almost unexpected re-emergence on the political scene. This hype is also worrying as it is indicative of how volatile and *individual-orientated* the political atmosphere in Armenia is. Levon has made a 90min speech mostly criticising the existing regime, he has shown us no real alternative and no real manifesto or directions as of yet, though what is really worrying is that suddenly the public is already all hyped up about his re-emergence. Armenian politics is still about particular individuals, rather than concrete policies and directions. […]

[…]

Levon Ter-Petrossyan and the forces that have gathered around him are an opposition, no doubt. But are they an Alternative? I seriously doubt that.

Levon Ter-Petrossyan is a liberalist. He’s just another technocrat. The bottom line is that he is a believer in free-market economy and capitalist economic and social relations. Does he or would he offer an alternative that addresses the requirements of working class? I doubt that. Would he repel the anti-unionist laws that are in place today? I doubt that. Would he remove the barriers for cooperative organizations? I doubt it. Would he decentralise sovereign power? Would he devolve the decision-making power to self-governing bodies (hamainqs)? Again, I doubt that.

Furthermore, although like never before Armenia needs and craves for freedom of information and civil liberties, this does not necessarily mean that a full blown liberalist economic formula is the answer to the economic problems at hand. What Armenia needs today is the return of Ideology - an ideology that would be original to stale liberalist discourses of 20th century that have proved to lead to centralisation of power under the ruling economical elite, corruption of values and capital accumulation. Like never before Armenian craves for a package of policies that carries an emphasised Social and Communal (hamaynqayin) and Communitarian (hamaynqakan) character, rather than a nationalist, liberalist or technocratic one.

Levon Ter Petrosian, Opposition Rally, Liberty Square, Yerevan, Republic of Armenia © Onnik Krikorian / Oneworld Multimedia 2007

Nevertheless, despite Kronstadt’s initial analysis, what is also interesting is the amount of inner reflection and retrospective on 16 years of independence that has also emerged. In part this is because to attack or even support Levon Ter Petrosian there is no choice but to examine Armenia’s recent history. Indeed, although Ter Petrosian has yet to offer an explanation or even an apology for many of the failings of his seven-year rule, others including Kronstadt are.

Nevertheless, I should point out that the main bundle of accusations against LTP is totally out of historical and economical context. It’s misleading and false. These accusations are usually reminding us of the economical collapse and hardships in early 1990s (the LTP years). And these hardships are always blamed on LTP - quite unfairly. This is one area where LTP cannot be plausibly accused, and here is the reason why: The way that Soviet production was organised is through a multitude of centrally controlled and state-organised production relations that span across the republics […] Anybody who reads research papers about this particular episode of history of post-Soviet space can confidently tell that this was the primary cause of the economical collapse and hardships that were experienced by all the post-Soviet republics. Levon Ter-Petrossyan in his tiny little Armenia had little to do with all this.

Even so, some serious concerns have to be raised. In the later years of his rule Ter Petrosian has much to answer for. When I arrived in Armenia in 1998, for example, it was those businessmen that made their money under him that were considered to be the most corrupt in the country. Individuals who wielded economic and political power under Ter Petrosian such as as Khachatur Sukiasian (Grzo) and the late Vazgen Sarkisian were synonymous with corruption and the huge discrepancy between those with, and those without.

Aram Sarkisian, Opposition Rally, Liberty Square, Yerevan, Republic of Armenia © Onnik Krikorian / Oneworld Multimedia 2007

Back then, people were furious with the “Sarksian clan,” including Vazgen’s brother, Aram, who was then in control of the Ararat cement factory and who became prime minister under Robert Kocharian for a short time after the 27 October 1999 assassinations. I remember well the accusations of corruption and nepotism that were circulating then, but which now appear to have been forgotten. Instead, Sukiasian is now simply an albeit wealthy “businessman” while Aram Sarkisian has taken on the role of one of the main leaders of Armenia’s revolutionary-wannabes.

In this context, Kronstadt’s conclusion is food for thought to say the least.

If LTP is elected won’t he overthrow the Kocharian Clan only to replace it with his own LTP Clan? Won’t he go hunting down all the businesses that have established their comfortable little profitable enterprises under the protective wings of Kocharian, Bargavach and HHK, only to replace those with petty enterprises under his own Cln? Yes, that’s quite a possibility. And that’s what you get when there is no proper ideology and no system of materially-grounded analytical thought in the country’s political terrain.

And perhaps that’s what’s most significant about the unfolding battle between Ter Petrosian and presidential-favorite Serzh Sarkisian. That is, if Kocharian’s coming to power represented a continuation of the system in place under Ter Petrosian, would his victory in next year’s election merely represent self-perpetuation? Names might change, but would anything else? This is the main question that Levon Ter Petrosian needs to answer sooner rather than later because for now, many such as Ara Manoogian at Martuni or Bust think they already know the answer.

If you ask me, LPT’s candidacy is just a scheme to make people feel as if they have some choices in who to elect, but the fact is that if the choice is between Serj and Levon, then there is no choice, since they are the same.

Writing a comment on an entry on his own blog, Observer details what we need to hear now from every candidate. It might be that as seldom few have raised such issues in the past, it’s at least encouraging to hear them being raised now, but to date there have been no responses from Kocharian, Sarkisian or Ter Petrosian. As Observer concludes in his comment, it probably doesn’t matter who becomes the next president as long as they are democratically elected and can be held accountable by the public.

I want these guys to talk about Import-Export, I want them to say what’s going to happen to Armenian monopolies - like that of the suger, oil, gas and petrol markets. I want them to tell me what are they going to do to make sure that the Central Bank of Armenia executes its functions and keeps the USD/AMD exchange at reasonable limits. I want them to tell me about their economic policy in simple terms, like you are saying: what’s in it for me, how much money will I earn, and what are they doing to do to make sure that I have opportunities to make a living in this country.

I want them to tell me what kind of education my son will have in 10 years time when he grows up, and what type of pension I will have in 30 years time, I want them to tell me what will they do to make health care match up to that name.

I want them to tell me what do they plan to do with all the people, that have to go to Russia, to earn a living. I want them to tell me that they will never surrender Kharabakh.

I guess this is a basic outline of all that I want them to tell me. And I definitely don’t want to hear who is the greater robber and idiot of them all - I know the answer: power corrupts, and these guys have too much power, so it really doesn’t matter who is on top, as long as they’re ready to answer my questions and be accountable.

If that happens then there is some hope. If it doesn’t, then Kronstadt’s concerns will probably become reality and Armenia will continue along its slow and painful path of “managed democratization” regardless of who comes to power. The full post is here.

Opposition Rally, Liberty Square, Yerevan, Republic of Armenia © Onnik Krikorian / Oneworld Multimedia 2007