RFE/RL has some interesting if fairly quirky news items that indicate that at the end of every year, people like looking forward to the next one. In what is more like an op-ed than an article, Emil Danielyan reflects on recent progress in negotiations between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the disputed territory of Nagorno Karabakh and suggests that a “momentous” deal on Karabakh is imminent.

The past year will be remembered by many in Armenia and Azerbaijan for fresh electoral fraud and missed opportunities for democratization, but it may also go down in history as a turning point in the long-running efforts to resolve the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh.

[…]

There are strong indications that the two men have already agreed on the basic parameters of a peaceful settlement that would almost certainly formalize Armenian control over Karabakh. For longtime Karabakh conflict watchers accustomed to deadlocked negotiations, this may be too good to be true. But never before have there been so many upbeat statements by international mediators and even the conflicting parties.

According to Danielyan, the Armenian President Robert Kocharian is due to meet his Azerbaijani counterpart Ilham Aliyev in January or February, and while many might scorn the idea that either would concede to the other, there has been considerable speculation since the end of 2004 that a peace deal is close.

Danielyan also stresses the point that the OSCE has already toured some of the territory surrounding Karabakh to assess the possibility of deploying a peacekeeping mission. They are due to visit other [Armenian-controlled] parts of Azerbaijan in January.

Danielyan specifically refers to anonymous leaks from a senior government official in July to back up this increasing optimism regarding the negotiations, and I have it on other good authority that this information is correct. Danielyan says that Turkish officials have also confirmed this.

The official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that at the heart of it is the idea of a referendum in which Karabakh’s predominantly Armenian population will decide whether the region should be independent, become part of Armenia or return under Azerbaijani rule. The referendum, he said, would be held in 10-15 years from the start of a gradual Armenian pullout from all but one of the seven occupied Azerbaijani districts surrounding Karabakh.

[…]

The information was confirmed in August by the Turkish newspaper “New Anatolian” that quoted government officials in Ankara familiar with the negotiations. That the Karabakh settlement under discussion envisages such a referendum was also revealed by the Azerbaijani daily “Zerkalo” on Wednesday. Citing “informed diplomatic sources” in Baku, the paper said the sides still disagree on when the vote should be held.

Interestingly, Danielyan also refers to the belief that nationalists in both countries would hardly agree to either ceding Karabakh and possibly Lachin on the part of Azerbaijan, or returning territory around Karabakh without an resolution of the issue of its status in the short-term on the part of Armenia.

However, says Danielyan, in a year when parliamentary elections in Azerbaijan and a referendum to amend the constitution in Armenia were accompanied by widespread fraud, since when did public opinion matter to either president?

None of the elections held there since the Soviet collapse have been recognized as free and fair by the international community. On top of that, Aliev and Kocharian control powerful security apparatuses that have successfully suppressed all opposition challenges to their rule — most recently in the wake of last November’s parliamentary elections in Azerbaijan and constitutional referendum in Armenia.

Progress in the Karabakh peace process is widely seen as the reason why the United States and Europe are unlikely to sanction either regime for serious fraud reported during the votes. The next few months will show whether the Western leniency was worth it.

As sign of increasing pressure on Armenia to hold democratic elections is mounting, Danielyan also reports on the Armenian Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian’s “heart felt” warning that any lack of progress in democratization in the country now has an economic cost, namely multi-million dollar assisance from the United States’ Millennium Challenges Account (MCA).

“We are now in a situation where any step away from democratization and a repeat of electoral fraud would have an economic cost. And I can name that cost: 235 million dollars,” he added, referring to the amount of extra U.S. aid to Armenia that was approved this month as part of Washington’s Millennium Challenge Account program.

[…]

According to Oskanian, a proper conduct of the next parliamentary and presidential elections, due in 2007 and 2008 respectively, is also vital for Armenia’s relations with the European Union, another major donor. The EU has also criticized the handling of the November 27 referendum, openly questioning Yerevan’s commitment to democracy.

[..]

The stark warning was addressed to “those individuals who resort to violations” of the electoral law. Oskanian did not name them, saying only that the country must not suffer “for the sake of some people’s political careers.” The Syrian-born former U.S. citizen went on to urge the authorities and the Armenian opposition to embark on a “dialogue” on the issue.

Well, as lovely as that all sounds, perhaps Oskanian can explain why whenever he and others decry electoral falsifications, words are never accompanied by the prosecution of those who stuffed ballots, intimidated or bribed voters, or who purposely manipulated numbers in the electoral commissions.

Still, it’s progress for the Minister since 2003 when, in an open letter to the Diaspora, he tried to downplay western criticism of the presidential elections held in two round during February and March. Actually, it’s a great spin that many people in the Diaspora bought into, and now we’re paying the price.

Observers detected tabulation mistakes and discrepancies in the number of votes received by all candidates from the local to the territorial and national levels. The differences are sometimes to one candidate’s advantage and sometimes to another’s. The CEC explains this as tabulation error or data entry error, regrettable and definitely in need of improvement.

[…]

Does this mean that there was no manipulation of numbers? Admittedly, it does not. By the observers’ own accounts, there was, and in the final round, the manipulation was to the benefit of both candidates. But it was not the endemic, widespread, across-the-board failure some have made it out to be. In each instance where such numbers have been noted, they have been so small as not to have any influence on the outcome. Still, they are still a clear indication that the process has serious shortcomings, and whether they were errors or intentional manipulation, such practices must be removed.

Ballot stuffing, too, has been ascribed to both candidates in the second round, and several candidates in the first. In general, observers charged ballot stuffing in some 70 polling places – less than 5% of all precincts. The numbers of false ballots did not exceed 100 in any precinct. As a result, a total of less than 10,000 or less than one percent of the total vote. This small percentage has succeeded in throwing a pall over our elections.

[…]

President Kocharian spent the month prior to the election, as well as the weeks between the two rounds, emphasizing that no one needed clean elections more than he. The opposition, which knew months earlier that it had no chance of winning – their own polls had indicated this – also was very aware that Kocharian needed clean elections. Therefore, if they couldn’t beat him at the ballot box, they tried to beat him on the international stage by tarnishing the entire political life of the country itself.

[…]

To understand the polarized, emotional, personalized election campaign, one must understand the following political context.

First, since 1997-98, when President Ter Petrossian resigned, and President Kocharian took office, there has been great bitterness on the part of the former ruling party to ‘get back’ at Kocharian.

[…]

Since 1998, President Kocharian has indeed very quietly managed to rid the ranks of government of several individuals for their illicit activities. They too, are, for obvious reasons, looking for ways to re-appear in positions of power.

[…]

Despite efforts to demean Armenia and diminish its standing, however, Armenia registered a number of successes in these elections. These deserve to be recognized in order to strengthen the hands of those who made the system work, and to empower the electorate to be more assertive and self-assured in the May Parliamentary elections.

Observers admit that part of their negative assessment is conditioned by the fact that Armenia has always been held to higher standards than other countries in the region. This may have adverse immediate affects, but in the long term, it’s a credit to Armenia.

[..]

Voters also saw that even in the former Soviet space, a government can indeed not tamper with voting results, even when the incumbent president’s first round total was just short of the required 50% + 1. This, too, will be a lesson they will want applied consistently in the future. It’s not a small victory.

Anyway, as the 27 November referendum showed, the democratic process that regressed significantly during the 2003 presidential elections has now culminated in widespread voter apathy. Unfortunately, Oskanian’s words mean nothing to me, and not least since he is part of the same team that not only facilitated the falsifications, but also benefitted from them.

Still, can’t blame Oskanian, I guess. That’s his job, and specificially in terms of making declarative statements in order to get more dosh from the U.S.

Meanwhile, on a brighter note, RFE/RL says that the government has decided to increase poverty benefits to the poorest of Armenian families. The lucky sods will now receive 15,000 AMD (about $30) a month on average and must be dancing in the streets as I type up this post. Yet even so, the increase is mimimal considering news that Armenia once again posted double digit growth in 2005.

A group of IMF economists described it as “remarkable” in a research paper published earlier this month. “In coming years, economic growth and capital formation should be broad-based and generate employment,” they wrote. The IMF experts also predicted that the growth rate will slow down to single-digit levels in 2006-2010.

Unfortunately, however, none of this seems to have manifested itself into the more equal distribution of wealth, and suggests that the problem of tax evasion among Armenia’s richest businessmen, as well as the undeclared incomes of government officials, still remains the most important one to tackle in coming year.