Sitting here in Yerevan it’s still hard to forsee how the May parliamentary election will be conducted. Yes, we know that massive vote buying is underway dressed up as charity, and yes, we know that while the opposition is already screaming foul, the Government promises that like a leopard changing its spots, the vote will be democratic and exemplary.

Others, however, consider that any of these opinions is irrelevant anyway. Elections are not decided by how many votes are cast for this or that candidate, but they are rather determined by whether whoever breaks the electoral code can get away with it. On that, Observer at What Democracy Means looks at the real players who will really decide everything in May.

That is, the international community in the form of Europe, and particularly the U.S. Government. Observer explains.

[…] all the arguments brought to and for this or that candidate in the article are most irrelevent to see the overall picture in the country. […] The point is - small nations like us should always remember, that for big nations like US, Russia there are no such things as values, human rights or democratic principles outside of their immediate state borders.

Pointing its readers to a report by Armenia Now, Ditord quotes an excerpt from the article which puts across the view of Armenian-American Analyst Richard Giragosian. Critics charge that Giragosian is too close to the U.S. State Department, and some say particularly the U.S. military, but in that case it means his reading of the situation should be of great interest to us all.

“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.

[…] 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.”

Giragosian has already stated in Yerevan that the U.S. will likely favour Kocharian passing on power to his most trusted lieutenant, Serzh Sarkisyan, but Observer says he is disappointed, and he has a point. Cynics would argue that the U.S. is not really interested in clean elections in Armenia if it can get its way in other areas, but that’s hardly democracy, right?

The one and only thing moving the world powers is profit: economic, political, military gains, etc. I have said previously in my blog posts, that the Armenian people can only count on themselves if they really want democracy, because nobody else is going to come round helping us - as it is not in any global power’s interests. We are too small to represent a market, we have no nuclear arms to pose dangers to their security, etc, etc…

The conclusion by the analysts kills me - it is so very true, but so utterly disgusting!

I’d agree to some extent, but when the West kept quiet about highly flawed elections in 2003, did corruption reduce? Did the criminalization of the country lessen? No, and if anything, it was only after presidential and parliamentary elections held that year that corruption and crime literally skyrocketed in Armenia. Indeed, Transparency International Armenia’s Chairperson explained it thus in an interview I held with her in 2004.

Now, do you really think that authorities that come to power through political corruption can fight against it? I don’t think so. They can adopt as many strategies and laws as they like but if there is no true desire from the top of the governance system to start fighting corruption in Armenia any strategy and law will fail.

Interestingly, Anoush in Armenia attended last week’s presentation of Transparency International’s 2006 Corruption Perception Survey where this conclusion was largely confirmed.

The survey revealed some concerning statistics, particularly alarming and revealing to me as we approach parliamentary elections- approximately 90 days away.

Consider the following two statements from the Executive Summary:

“Most of the 2006 respondents were alarmed by a negative impact of corruption on the legitimacy of the Armenian authorities and the moral of the society, which did not come across in 2002…”

“While prioritizing the solutions to improve the current situation, most respondents pointed to a necessity of ensuring free and fair elections”

SO, if everyone realizes that the existing corrupt system is bad, and that free and fair elections is a way to improve the situation, then why does it seem like such an uphill battle to convince people to get out and vote this Spring. To sign up to become election observers. To protest when their rights to dissent are put into jeopardy. RIGHT NOW is the perfect opportunity for citizens of Armenia to do something.

[…]

And perhaps finally, we should reflect on the fact tht 96% of the public says they get their information from television.

And 0% of TV in Armenia is independent since A1+ was shut down by the government five years ago this April.

The up-hill battle continues.

Still, whether the population can be mobilized to actually protect their votes and demand that elections in Armenia are free and fair is anybody’s guess, but I think that most analysts consider that the electorate is still largely apathetic and will either take the bribes offered to them or boycott the vote in understandable disgust.

Still, for Europe and the U.S. it might not matter. After all, with more and more news of closer military ties between Armenia and the U.S. coming with increasing regularity, the present regime does represent the best interests of the West. Even now, more and more reports indicate that a Karabakh deal is still on the table and could be signed after the vote in May.

Goran Lennmarker, chairman of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, hinted that the conflicting parties will try to seal a compromise peace accord shortly after the May parliamentary elections in Armenia.

“I think there is a golden opportunity to reach an agreement on Nagorno-Karabakh between Armenia and Azerbaijan,” he told RFE/RL during a visit to Yerevan.

The Swedish parliamentarian said earlier that such an opportunity was created by last November’s meeting of the Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents that rekindled hopes for a near-term solution to the Karabakh dispute. Although President Robert Kocharian cautioned afterwards that he will not cut any peace deals before the upcoming elections, observers expect a fresh and possibly decisive push for an Armenian-Azerbaijani settlement in the second half of this year.

“I think there is an opportunity after the parliamentary elections to come to a conclusion,” agreed Lennmarker.

In the same RFE/RL article Lennmarker is also quoted as calling for democratic elections in Armenia this year, but I’m sorry, I don’t believe that this is as important to Europe or the U.S. as resolution of the Karabakh conflict and regional integration. The issue of normalizing relations with Turkey is also of paramount importance, and as RFE/RL Press Review notes, Kocharian’s most likely successor is still saying the right things.

“Hayots Ashkhar” and “Hayastani Hanrapetutyun,” meanwhile, reprint Defense Minister Serzh Sarkisian’s extensive article that appeared in the Brussels-based weekly “European Voice.” “If Turkey lifts the blockade, my country will find itself geographically closer to Europe, something which stems from everybody’s interests,” Sarkisian wrote. “Armenia already has common interests with the European Union on a number of issues, from regional security to development of democracy. In the name of Hrant Dink’s memory, let us embark on a process of peaceful dialogue that can only be made possible by normalized relations.”

Well, to be honest, such developments would be beneficial for Armenia and the region, but while I might look forward to the day when such objectives can be reached, something doesn’t sit quite well with me in my stomach. If Turkey can’t truly develop and evolve towards democracy without genuinely addressing dissent and nationalism within, shouldn’t the same be true in Armenia?

Indeed, one wonders if rather than bring stability, another set of falsified elections in Armenia will instead bring precisely the opposite. We’re seeing that in Turkey, and I don’t suppose Armenia is any different. On the other hand, the Republic is a landlocked country of somewhere between 2-3 million people and has no natural resources or anything much of note in global terms so who cares?

Unfortunately, not the country’s population, it would seem. Perhaps the West has it right. I just wish that there was genuine momentum towards democracy and regional integration instead. Still, Turkey was a member of the Council of Europe for over 50 years before it got close to aspiring for EU membership, so why shouldn’t gradual “managed” democratic development be the model for Armenia?

It’s sad, but as Observer says, until the population actually realizes it has a stake in its own future, what other path is there? Russia may try to throw a spanner into the works as Armenia moves closer westwards, but I guess we’ll see how much muscle they have when Sarkisyan courts Washington and Strasbourg more and more as the 2008 presidential election gets closer and closer.

In the meantime, I’d guess it’s becoming increasingly more and more obvious why Zhirayr Sefilyan was arrested and why even the Council of Europe has remained noticeably silent on the matter of someone who could be now considered a political prisoner. Funny to consider that this time round it’s the Armenian opposition that could be considered more “nationalistic” than the authorities.

Even so, and to echo the final words of Harut Hambartsumyan, Chairperson of the It’s Your Choice domestic observation organization when I recently interviewed him, I’d like to see just one democratic election in Armenia. Not too democratic, of course — that’s too unrealistic for now, but just some albeit small sign of gradual and genuine change to give us hope for the future.

Maybe I’m just too naive.