Time For A New Opposition?
As I’ve said on this blog before, one of the many reasons for the recent victory of pro-governmental parties in Saturday’s election wasn’t just the possible vote buying that is alleged to have occurred, but also because the traditional opposition here failed to offer an alternative. Indeed, rather than present the electorate with well formulated arguments for protecting their votes or voting for them, many of the more radical opposition groups spoke only of a revolution to be invoked the day after the election.
With the exception of Orinats Yerkir and Heritage, they didn’t even bother to campaign. Now, as EurasiaNet suggests, perhaps it’s time for a new opposition to emerge that can address the very real and serious problems facing Armenia today. Indeed, the online publication argues, this might be one other positive outcome of the 12 May vote.
“These elections were not the victory of the ruling party,” commented one veteran opposition member of parliament. “They were the defeat of the opposition.”
As a result, many Armenian observers believe that the time has come for a new opposition.
“The era of political scarecrows has passed. Those people who are already involved in other spheres are entering politics,” stated sociologist Aharon Adibekian at a May 14 briefing. “We have entered a new stage in the development of [our] political culture.”
Coming up with fresh ideas that resonate with average voters, rather than relying on the name recognition of past political celebrities, is widely thought to be the most difficult task now facing the opposition.
Stepan Demirichian and Aram Sarkisian both became politicians following the 1999 assassination of their father (Parliamentary Speaker Karen Demirchian) and brother (Prime Minister Vazgen Sarkisian), respectively. Since entering the National Assembly in 2003, neither presented any “serious legislative initiative,” argued political scientist Styopa Safrarian, director of the Armenian Center of National and International studies, run by Heritage Party leader Raffi Hovannisian.
The time both have spent boycotting parliament to protest President Kocharian’s rule as “illegal” led to the impression among voters that neither party was in a position to attend to the needs of their supporters, Safrarian said.
[…]
But one former high-ranking official under ex-President Levon Ter-Petrossian (1991-1998), who asked not to be named, calls these changes an opportunity, another step away from Armenia’s post-Soviet political heritage. Armenia is now undergoing a “transformation process,” he said — a time of political evolution, not revolution.
This same need is also expressed on the Armenian Blog Review.
I have been writing about the need to get rid of many stupid-little person-based political parties and having 5-6 parties in Parliament, who will be forced to focus on issues, rather then vague ideas pursued by the likes of Impeachment, and that is exactly what happened in these elections. Armenian people finally have started to understand, that bubbles like Tigran Karapetich, Stepan Demirchyan, shouting heads like Artashes Geghamyan, Arshak Sadoyan, revolutionaries like Aram Sargsyan and Nikol Pashinyan have nothing to do in the parliament.
Secondly, my prediction about the fact, that the International Community is ready to embrace these elections in Armenia as free and fair if there is enough imitation by the government, materialized, which served to fulfill a couple of important functions for the Armenian society:
1. Political parties finally come to understand, that only work with the people can bring them to power - not devising more and more systems of forgery (although that also took place in this elections on a massive scale, but then it involved also direct bribing of people, which is still work with people if you ask me). We all saw, that shouting about corruption facts without presenting clear alternatives, visiting various countries and talking to Embassy heads doesn’t render any results, and this was well understood even by Orinats Yerkir, which got into Parliament in the end despite the British Spy sandal, largely due to hard work with the voters.
2. Looking at the parliament we are going to have today, I have to note, that regardless what anybody says, the Republicans, Bargavach and Dashnaktsutyun have the most amount of offices countrywide, have invested heavily in their party structures and have indeed worked with people on local issues, and as we all should know by now: all politics is local!
3. Armenian people received a clear signal, that if they want change, International community is not the right place to look for it. All change has to come from within.
Anyway, let’s see. Hopefully a mature opposition can emerge and lessons be learned from this election. Certainly, certain groupings within civil society and the opposition need to learn that their focus on preparing for a revolution which never came was wrong and also less than democratic. Instead there needs to be real civic education in Armenia and a maturity among all walks of political life in Armenia. This includes the NGO sector in particular.
I can only now hope that this will be the case as if the government can be criticized for the conduct of the election, so too can the opposition, civil society and the electorate. Moreover, while the election was an improvement in terms of governmental forces adapting to a new reality, it’s time for the opposition to do so also. If some of the electorate took bribes it was mainly because they saw no possibility for the opposition that did exist to offer an alternative to those in power today.
Thus, no revolution was carried out in Armenia
The reason that no revolution was carried out in Armenia was that the society realized that there is the Karabakh Conflict, the issue of the Armenian-Turkish relations existing and the not quite friendly region that Armenia has to deal with.
Any elections in Armenia, like in all the other post Soviet areas, are the end of the world. No one is happy; all accuse each other (and never themselves) of all deadly sins. But the elections held on May 12 in Armenia became a little exception. The conclusion the international observers arrived at and the careful remark made by the US State Department poured like cold water on the defeated opposition.
/PanARMENIAN.Net/ “The Parliamentary elections in Armenia were democratic. In comparison with the previous elections the Parliamentary elections held on May 12 complied with all international democratic standards,” announced the head of the observation mission of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, OSCE PA Vice-President Tone Tingsgard. The elections were indeed held peacefully, with minimum violations; as the head of the CIS observation mission Vladimir Rushailo said, elections can never be perfect. The truth is, however, that everything depends on how much the violations influence the final results. In Armenia these violations are, let’s say, of technical character, and didn’t have any impact on the results. In other words, no revolution in Armenia was carried out, and the reason was that the society realized that there is the Karabakh Conflict, the issue of the Armenian-Turkish relations existing and the not quite friendly region that Armenia has to deal with, and that it could have very dangerous consequences for the country to take such a risk.
As for the three leading parties, they definitely won. The Republican Party, the Prosperous Armenia and Dashnaktsutiun got their votes. The existence of the two oppositional parties Orinats Yerkir and Heritage was quite explicable.
[…]
«PanARMENIAN.Net» analytical department
Comment by Onnik — May 17, 2007 @ 2:51 am
From RFE/RL’s Press Review:
Comment by Onnik — May 17, 2007 @ 3:05 am
Onnik - the amount of organizations in the civil society preparing for a revolution is ridiculously low - in fact I don’t know anyone who’s serious about it, and please don’t get started on CRD/TI being a revolutionary org.
Even Sksela, which might have had some thoughts about a potential revolution, didn’t seem serious about it at all - at least I didn’t notice it, and like I said, I have joined this group mainly because I see it doing exactly what you’re suggesting, trying to work raising civic awareness, which it should continue doing - in my humble opinion.
As to the opposition - many of them were and still are dead serious about it - but as we saw on May 10-th at the NSS doors - police are prepared to brutally crush any such attempts.
Comment by Observer — May 17, 2007 @ 12:17 pm
Well, Observer, “we” didn’t see, did we because you weren’t there. Instead, opinion is divided about outside the NSS building. I’ve already said that it occurred to me that the police were taken by surprise and there was the mood for a clash in the air among opposition supporters and leaders before the march even. Secondly, I don’t think the police “brutally crushed” the march even though it was not sanctioned by the municipality.
Instead, after the rumble, demonstrators were not dispersed and stayed for quite a while outside the NSS building before being allowed to march on Liberty Square. Maybe I’d even say that this was even an improvement for the police and security forces. It wasn’t April 12/13 and it wasn’t brutal. Instead, there was a clash when Pashinian probably tried to rush at the door. Even if not the case, the situation was soon under control and I haven’t heard of any other cases of beatings other than in the brief skirmish between one group of opposition supporters and police.
As for CRD-TI Armenia and Sksela — as YOU mention them — they were too close to groups like Impeachment and you could see that by who was involved in what turned out to be official and unofficial mutual events and activities. As just one example, during the time at CRD-TI Armenia I posted about Artur Baghdasarian’s letter to the Wall Street Journal where he stated in a major international publication that Armenia needs democratic elections.
When one of CRD-TI Armenia’s employees read that post which was both critical of Orinats Yerkir for its history before 2004, as well as supportive of the general message in Baghdasarian’s letter, a complaint was made by one CRD-TI Armenia member to the Chairperson of the organization saying that it should be removed because it would be giving Orinats Yerkir “publicity.”
Actually, every major news outlet of any worth this covered this story, and it’s worth pointing out that the individual concerned here was an ex-Orinats Yerkir supporter who now hated Baghdasarian and who attended Impeachment rallies. It was suggested that the post be removed and that I not make posts about Orinats Yerkir and Baghdasarian again. Since then, I’ve heard others say that some NGOs also acted in “opposition” to the party, favoring support for more radical groups.
Indeed, let’s put it like this. Sksela and other NGO representatives attended every Impeachment rally, but were never to be seen at other political party meetings. Didn’t see them at Orinats Yerkir or Heritage meetings in the center, for example, so what does this say to you?
Says to me that they were behind Impeachment and their message was quite simple. Prepare for 13 May. However, you’re right, the hope for revolution was never serious because Impeachment didn’t represent anything to many people here. However, some in civil society put their hopes in them. As another example, weeks before April 12, Sksela and CRD-TI Armenia were discussing marching up Baghramian with plastic bottles.
As it happened, they didn’t, but Impeachment did. The last point is simply this, Diasporan observers for IYC through CRD-TI Armenia all seem to give the conduct of election a thumbs up, but their opinion does not seem to be taken into account by CRD-TI Armenia in its statement on the election. Indeed, it seems to have again allied itself with that somehow more radical section of civil society that again is more likely to be found at an Impeachment rally than at anything genuinely interested in democracy.
Like I said, “we didn’t see,” because I was here before 1 April when you were in England. If the governmental forces can be criticized for the conduct of the two months leading up to the election, so too can some — but not all — members of civil society. For example, from some civil society representatives in receipt of tens of thousands of dollars for “democratic election related programs” I was shocked to hear one opinion voiced a few times, including from the head of one significant NGO here that I will not mention.
They were things like “I hate these bastards. I’ll do anything to get this government out of power. I won’t allow Serzh to become President.”
Hmmm, even if people vote for them and him, huh? Great, some democracy. Meanwhile, I was also told not to write about groups such as the Civil Society Institute who wanted to use the law to ensure free and fair democratic elections rather than exploit foreign money and the election campaign to push out anti-government propaganda. Indeed, I even saw this in one organization when rather than try to raise issues concerning the electoral code with the CEC, they wanted to just hold a press conference and accuse the government of falsification.
As it was It’s Your Choice refused to the idea and raised the issues, and the CEC apparently agreed and voted to address the issues, which were/ Now, that is REALLY civil society becoming involved in the democratic process. Pushing and using the means at their disposal for real democratic changes rather than looking to find anything with which to effectively try and raise political tensions. Ironically, despite their cooperation together with the observers, IYC have said the election was progress, while CRD-TI Armenia say it was some kind of brutal falsification against the will of the people.
Instead, everyone who was actually near to or inside a polling station point to the election as being a surprising improvement. This time round, they even blogged their impressions to effectively add transparency to the OSCE and IYC conclusion.
http://lifearoundme.wordpress.com/2007/05/13/long-expected-elections-in-the-past/
http://www.cilicia.com/2007/05/look-at-me-im-observing.html
http://noteshairenik.blogspot.com/2007/05/running-around-on-election-day.html
http://oneworld.blogsome.com/2007/05/13/waiting-for-election-results/
Incidentally, I spoke to many IYC observers on election day as well as OSCE observers then and the day after as well as more Diasporan observers, and they all agreed. Given that, maybe we can talk about constructive and non-constructive civil society as well as a constructive and non-constructive opposition, and it’s why I think blogs are also critical for the transparency and accountability of civil society as well as the government. The public has so far lost faith in both.
Comment by Onnik — May 17, 2007 @ 2:53 pm
I agree with Observer on this one.
And there is another point that needs to be added. In a small and geopolitically significant and economically debiliated economy such as Armenia, democratic system of Parliamentary Representation and Republicanist Presidency will always remain as an aeasy, convenient and invisible manipulation tool by the imperialists and the the forces of Global Capitalism. To expect anything constructive to emerge out of the system of elections/representations, is quite simply naive. The rulling class when left freely floating inevitablyy becomes the representative of the Global Capital, rather then of its people. Even the western democracies are full of such examples: Labour in Britain, which was hijacked by people who never even read any decent left-wing texts, PASOK in Greece and so forth. As it stands, there is no significant party in Armenia that works o in the interests of its people who are desperately in need of suc political force - NOT because there is no will, but because there is a lack of imagination and a systemic ideological framework that would explain the esisting cul-de-sac in terms of a vigorous economical analysis and a a type of analystsis that would point to the System (both local and global) which imacts the workings of the Global spere down to the local spheres such as poorest communities in a country like Armenia. There needs to be a system of political thought (ideology) that would be able to show people a broad picture and show them a vision of a realistic future with long term solutions. The reason why the parties chose to hand out 5000 drams per vote, is because they didn’t have anything else of serious substance to hand out. And opposition parties alike, have no ideological substance… well they didn’t have 5000 drams eaither so they didn’t get ellected.
As for presenting programs, Onnik, I think you’re wrong - parties like MIAK, Orinats Erkin, Herritage and even Bargavatch… they all presented programs, however those progams were artificial “problem-solving” and what they call “technocratic” programs without a system of political thought to back their arguments. And people saw through all that. Even in party manifestos, there was this tone, as if people are stupid and that these great individuals are here equipped with some superior mysterious knowledge to save them. I think Armenian population is more clever then that. For now, some chose to go with the “Rational Choice Theory” — they took the 5000 drams. My hopes lie not in civic education (which in my vocabulary is another terms for teaching and “convincing” people to accept the existing structure as the End of History), but with political philosophy, politicisation of culture and art.
Small nations are easiest to fall for Nationalism, and once again we have seen Nationalism and Fears play the key role in people’s votes. Yet the irony is that the outcome of these elections themselves pose a serious security threat.
Comment by Sasuntsi Anarchist — May 17, 2007 @ 3:30 pm
No, you don’t just get it. I’m not happy with the situation in the political field or civil society in Armenia. Most of them are only interested in money and power. However, while I see that, you and Observer only want to see that in those groupings you’re not linked to.
Very simple. All the political parties offered artificial “problem-solving” and promises they could never keep while actually using them to hide their own ambitions and the same is true with most of the major players in the NGO sector. That’s the only thing we disagree on.
Still, we know the problem and we always have. Now, isn’t it time that somebody really started to look for a solution? Well, someone told me recently not to expect a solution to come from the government, opposition or civil society. All of them are somehow “comfortable” with the situation in Armenia.
Well, this time round, not some opposition groups who have finally disappeared after ignoring their potential electorate, perhaps, but just as the ruling elite enriches itself by holding on to power, there are those on the other side who are doing quite nicely thank you.
On that, I wonder when the next batch of USAID money will flood into Armenia for those same NGOs to use incorrectly and inefficiently before finding themselves a day after the election in the same situation they find themselves in now? Wealthier, for sure, but without their chosen political force in power.
Still, I can at least be thankful for the mature attempts by some NGOs to engage in true democratization in Armenia, but even the most vocal of that sector is in the same shape as the political field. Some were politically partisan from day one, for example, even to the point of ignoring or attacking other opposition groups in competition with their own.
Comment by Onnik — May 17, 2007 @ 4:43 pm
Onnik - when saying “we” I didn’t mean to say I was there… I meant “we” all saw it through various media reports…
That’s just a side note
Comment by Observer — May 18, 2007 @ 12:34 am
I can’t remember any media reports that could be considered independent or unbiased reporting that the police brutally dealt with an unsanctioned march on the NSS (KGB) building. All I can remember is reports that actually tried to work out what happening saying that a march by radical opposition supporters resulted in a clash at some point during proceedings after Nikol Pashinian and others tried to rush at the NSS-KGB door.
Otherwise, as I recall, apart from that one incident, protesters were neither arrested or beaten except when a clash under still unsure circumstances occurred.
Anyway, I was there and my impressions were that as the line of red berets moved on up the road they left a space behind them and some opposition supporters rushed through it. Sirens sounded as an alarm to call the red berets back and after some confusion they understood that there were needed by the door and ran back. I followed them to find that a scuffle had broken out. After that was controlled, there were no other incidents and as I said, the demonstration was neither dispersed or attacked again.
Comment by Onnik — May 18, 2007 @ 12:44 am
Onnik - I didn’t say police brutally crushed the rally on May 10th, I said - we saw = we understood, that they’re prepared to do it. It was a demonstration of power - both from the side of opposition and from the side of the government.
From what I understand and what a number of other people I talked to mentioned, that day Nikol was deliberately pushing for it, to see just how far the government would go if there were serious protests after the elections. And as we all saw it (I don’t mean to say I was there;) ) - police reacted as it should, if you ask me, restoring order, but doing it with some excess brutality - some video and photos I saw at A1plus and Aramazd’s blog prove just that. (Not that A1plus is the example of objectivity or anything, but those people didn’t beat themselves, did they?)
One of the facts, that nobody really wanted to turn up at the Impeachment rally on 13th May was because people had understood in the aftermath of May 10th, that the police are prepared to go as far as they need, and that they will be as brutal, as it takes to stop a potential revolution. That was a clear message projected on May 10th, and I’m sure you’re well aware of that.
Comment by Observer — May 18, 2007 @ 12:49 am
I have to say I don’t consider it brutal — especially if compared to 12/13 April 2004. Indeed, Impeachment even concluded that they won the clash outside NSS. Dozens weren’t arrested, the clash was isolated, and the demo wasn’t dispersed and actually continued on to Liberty Square.
As for 13 May, no, I don’t agree. I think people didn’t attend because the international observers would saying the election was an improvement was broadcast into their rooms much earlier. That, and the fact that the opposition didn’t even advertise their rally properly.
Some people — although not many — turned up at 2pm, for example, and hassled organizers for initially giving this time when the event had later been changed to 5pm. Besides, as I said, there appeared only to be short-lived violence outside the NSS because Impeachment were pushing for it.
Well, tomorrow we’ll know. However, even if they have 15,000 people it’s unlikely to change anything because they don’t have any real support in Armenia. People have already moved on from the election and are tired of hearing more about it. The opposition had their chance to unite and push for change, but petty rivalries and personal ambition put a stop to that.
The only way I can see that changing is if Orinats Yerkir and Heritage were to join tomorrow’s rally, but would they be accepted, I wonder? I mean, all of these guys put competition with each other even above regime change. Funny. Ironic even.
Comment by Onnik — May 18, 2007 @ 2:58 am