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 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.

The full post is on the Armenia Election Monitor 2008 Blog.