Tweet
The Armenian Weekly On-Line
80 Bigelow Avenue
Watertown MA 02472 USA
(617) 926-3974
[email protected]
http://www.a rmenianweekly.com
The Armenian Weekly; Volume 74, No. 6; Feb. 16, 2008
Commentary and Analysis:
1. To Believe or Not to Believe
By Zara Sargsyan
2. Armenian Elects President on Feb. 19
By Zaruhi Shushanian
3. Picking a Pair of Presidents
By Garen Yegparian
***
1. To Believe or Not to Believe
By Zara Sargsyan
The pre-election campaigns currently under way in Armenia are reminiscent of
incidents of mass hysteria. One of the Presidential candidates reads
Charents poems at rallies, while another boasts that he does not need the
poetry of Charents because he himself is the author of many works. Some are
supporting their candidate by organizing a dance at the Armenia Marriott
Hotel's Tigran the Great Hall, and amid all this, the citizens of Armenia,
tired of the songs, dances and poetry, are faced with questions like: To
believe or not to believe? Who to believe?
Promises, Platforms and Boasting
The candidates are generous in their promises. They start their speeches by
saying, "I am not giving promises," only to continue and say that they will
reduce taxes, increase salaries and pensions, provide housing and cars to
families with many children, resolve the Artsakh issue, alleviate corruption
and punish the current authorities. Among all these promises, perhaps the
one that captures one's attention most is "punishing the current
authorities." At the rallies of Armenia's first president Levon
Ter-Petrossian, we hear "Serjig go away!" and "Levon, Levon!" But what is
strikingly different in Ter-Petrossian's rallies today is the absence of the
spirit that was present in rallies in the late 1980s, when he had around him
figures symbolizing the national independence movement like Baruyr
Hayrikian, Vazgen Manougian, Silva Gaboudigian, Zori Balayan and thousands
of other intellectuals and political figures. Today, the people standing
next to him do not inspire trust. Many of them planted and nourished the
seeds of today's corruption during the years of Pan-Armenian National
Movement's reign. He is surrounded by people whose promises of punishing the
authorities are based exclusively on personal grudges. Hence, only very few
believe in the nobility of their aspirations.
At the same time, Serge Sarkisian, laying claim to all the victories of the
past decade and turning a blind eye to all the shortcomings of that period,
promises to lead the people "towards a baregetsik [rich, prosperous]
Armenia." This reminds us of the saying about lovers, "He promises the
impossible and doesn't deliver even the possible." I cannot see how one can
consider the building of a corrupt state system an accomplishment.
In this election, the position of the ARF candidate Vahan Hovannesian is
very solid. It is expected that the ARF will receive all the votes of its
solid base. Their chances could have been even higher had they not
associated themselves with the executive branch of the government. Their
association with the Republican party might prove to be a shortcoming to the
ARF candidate. Some also consider their criticism of the authorities not
very convincing and hence damaging to Hovannesian's prospects.
The candidates themselves insist that their programs and platforms have been
crafted with a high level of experimental and analytical approach. The
platform of Artur Baghdasaryan promises an unprecedented increase in
salaries and pensions after his proposed tax reductions. The "ararman
dzrakir" (the creation plan) ofArdashes Keghamian has become a bestseller,
while Dikran Karapetian actually announced that since there is the Bible, he
does not need an election platform...
Polls and Favorites
According to several polls, Sarkisian leads the race with a large margin
followed by Ter-Petrossian. Neither the authorities nor the opposition
doubts these predictions since these results seem to be convenient and
beneficial for both. When the prevailing atmosphere is that only these two
candidates have a chance to win, it will be easier to hunt for votes by the
ensuing panic. In such an atmosphere, those who have not yet decided who
>From the opposition they are going to vote for, would tend to vote for
Ter-Petrossian simply because they are opposed to Sarkisian. Similarly, the
portion of society that remembers all too well the woes of Armenia during
the presidency of Ter-Petrossian would vote for Sarkisian simply to avoid a
repetition of that era.
The active participation of observers from international organizations in
the election monitoring process does not guarantee democratic elections.
Democratic elections are possible when the people consciously vote for a
certain candidate, not against a candidate. The majority of voters in
Armenia will go to the polls not to express their will (gamk) but their
dismay (tjgamoutyoun). Hopelessness is a serious impediment on the road to
democracy. The voters are guided by the principle of electing the lesser of
two evils.
Election bribes are also a serious threat to the election process and amid
the pre-election confusion, we often hear about people giving bribes and
collecting personal information in return. This led the president of the
Central Electoral Committee to make a public statement that "giving away
personal information in no way affects the results of elections. However, I
call upon you not to give your personal information to anyone."
In this atmosphere, a portion of the electorate is actively participating in
their favored candidate's campaign, rallying for him and against his
opponent(s), while the other portion of voters is trying to find an answer
to the questions: To believe or not to believe? Who to believe?
And all voters, in their hearts, are wishing to see the name of Dikran the
Great on the ballot paper, in realization of their dream of a prosperous
Armenia, extending from sea to sea...
------------------------------------------- -------------------------------
2. Armenian Elects President on Feb. 19
By Zaruhi Shushanian
On Feb. 19, the 18 year-old Republic of Armenia (RA) will elect its third
president. For a country with a young democracy, the upcoming presidential
election is of crucial importance. The future of a country with closed
borders, its developing economy and the resolution of the Karabakh conflict
are at stake.
Nine Candidates
Nine candidates have been nominated by the RA Central Electoral Commission.
They are: Serge Sarkisian, RA Prime Minister and leader of the Republican
Party of Armenia; Vazgen Manukyan, former Prime Minister of Armenia and
leader of the National Democratic Union; Vahan Hovhannesian, deputy speaker
of the RA Parliament and member of the ARF-Dashnaktsutyun; Arthur
Baghdasaryan, leader of the Orinats Yerkir (State of Law) Party; Levon
Ter-Petrossian, leader of the Armenian National Movement opposition party);
Artashes Geghamian, leader of the National Unity Party; Tigran Karapetian,
leader of the Peoples' Party of Armenia and president of ALM (Alternative
Mass Media); Aram Harutyunian, head of the National Consent Party and
professor at Yerevan State University; and Arman Melikyan, former advisor to
the NKR President.
Long before the race officially began, some Armenian newspapers (mostly
opposition ones) talked about the possibility that certain candidates would
joining forces. None of the candidates, however, have removed their
candidacy bid so far.
Though the nine candidates constantly repeat their I-am-sure-of-my-victory
phrases, only a few of them have a clear lead over their rivals, judging
>From public polls and the number of citizens who have come out to support
both candidates during their rallies. They are Sarkisian, Ter-Petrossian as
well as Hovhannesian and Baghdasaryan.
According to the Haikakan Zhamanak (Armenian Times) Daily, the authorities
give a high approval rating to Baghdasaryan in "biased polls." It suits them
well to see Baghdasaryan in the second possible round, as it would guarantee
Serge Sarkisian's victory. However, the newspaper refrains from forecasting
the results of the February election, which "totally differs from the
preceding ones."
Baghdasaryan has suggested that his rivals form at least one unified
election campaign office in each region a week before the election. "We have
received positive feedback on this issue, and at present we are negotiating
with the representatives of the other candidates' election campaign offices
to work together for a free and transparent election," said Hovhannes
Margarian, a member of Orinats Yerkir.
What makes Hovhannesian stand out is that his election program and
approaches that are employed by candiates for office in democratic countries
in the West. He believes Armenia is governed by strong economic clans formed
after privatization in the 1990s. And "these clans have swallowed the
political power," he was quoted as saying.
The ARF candidate has signed over 170,000 agreements with citizens,
containing a summary of his program and the expectations of his electorate.
Any citizen who voluntarily signs the agreement gets a special card and
joins the candidate's election campaign.
Candidates Geghamian and Manukyan both have considerable experience in
participatng in elections and have their own viewpoints on the future
development of Armenia.
This time, he's not organizing rallies in Yerevan and Armenia's regions, as
most of his rivals do. Manukyan only uses his airtime to introduce his
election program and objectives. His slogan is: "To change, not to
tolerate."
Geghamian has made the most radical and offensive statements concerning his
rivals. During his rally held on Jan. 28, or Army Day, he blamed slain Prime
Minister Vazgen Sarkisian's brother Aram Sarkisian (who supports Levon
Ter-Petrossian) and his family for sowing anarchy in Armenia. Geghamian even
used offensive words when referring to Aram Sarkisian. Some local
organizations, including the Yerkrapah Kamavors (freedom fighters),
condemned the candidate's behavior.
According to the Aravot (Morning) Daily's poll conducted in December 2007,
Geghamian will be able to capture about five percent of the vote.
Karapetian believes he is the only candidate who can "offer an alternative
solution to all problems in the country."
Melikyan, in contrast to some of his rivals who are for the compromise
settlement of the Karabakh conflict, does not approve of any compromise and
or negotiations with Azerbaijan.
According to the Gallup Poll, Melikyan and Harutyunyan would earn less than
two percent of the vote in the February election.
Polls
On the initiative of the U.S. Gallup Organization, the Armenian Sociological
Association conducted a poll to gauge public opinion on the presidential
candidates. The poll was sponsored by the International Republican Institute
(IRI).
On Feb. 6, the A1 Plus Daily published an article claiming that the public
poll had nothing to do with Gallup and IRI. According to the source, IRI
representatives lack the authority to survey the rating of Presidential
candidates during the race. A1 Plus claims that the poll was instead taken
by a Lithuanian citizen named Rasa Alisausiene, who is "neither a Gallup
scientist nor expert." Instead, she is the president of Baltic Surveys Ltd.,
which has recently been cooperating with Gallup.
A1 Plus quotes an article published on Gallup's official website and in the
Harvard International Review-titled "Gallup Exclusive: Conflict in the
Caucasus: New Surveys on Azerbaijan-Armenia"-which estimates that 83 percent
of Armenians are dissatisfied with Prime Minister Serge Sarkisian's
policies.
According to Stepan Safarian, a member of the Zharangutyun (Heritage) Party,
Sarkisian's rating has dropped recently. In a poll taken by Aharon Adibekian's
Sociometer Free Sociological Centre last month, Sarkisian enjoyed 67 percent
of public support; yet, according to the Populus British Sociological
Company, the his rating was at 50.7 percent, explains Safarian.
By the end of this week, the Zharangutyun Party will announce who they are
going to support in the upcoming Presidential elections.
Ter-Petrossian Applies to Consitutional Court
On Feb. 8, Levon Ter-Petrossian applied to the RA Constitutional Court,
claiming obstacles were being placed against his election campaign.
Particularly, the Haylur news program (broadcast on the Public Television of
Armenia) has been propagandizing against Ter-Petrossian for the past three
months, he said, thus violating Articles 18, 20 and 22 of the RA Electoral
Code, as well as Articles 11 and 28 of the Law on Television and Radio. He
said it was the first time a Presidential candidate in Armenia is not able
to carry out his campaign on equal terms with his rivals.
According to Article 52, if insurmountable obstacles are made for a
candidate, the election wil be postponed for two weeks. If the obstacles are
not removed by the end of those two weeks, a new election is held after 40
days.
The Constitutional Court dismissed Ter-Petrossian's claim on Feb. 11.
OSCE/ODIHR Mission's Interim Report
In a December 2007 letter to RA Minister of Foreign Affairs Vartan Oskanian,
OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe) representative
Miklos Haraszti wrote: "The recent cases of harassment and violence against
independent and opposition media have contributed to an atmosphere of
intimidation and fear in the journalistic community in Armenia."
On Jan. 30, the OSCE/ODIHR (Office for Democratic Institutions and Human
Rights) Mission released the first interim report on the elections. The
mission observed local media coverage of the race from Jan. 11-20, closely
monitoring seven TV channels (the First Channel of the Public Television of
Armenia, "ALM," "Armenia," Second Armenian TV Channel, Kentron, Shant and
Yerkir Media); two radio channels (Public Radio of Armenia and Armenian
Service of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty); and daily newspapers (Hayastani
Hanrapetutiun, Aravot, Azg and Haikakan Zhamanak).
According to their conclusions, before the official campaign kicked off on
Jan. 21, "most of the broadcast media, including public television,
demonstrated a clear imbalance in their coverage of the prospective
candidates."
"Television is the most important information source for citizens," read the
report. "Despite the relatively high number of media outlets in Armenia, the
international organizations dealing with freedom of expression, including
OSCE, have previously noted a lack of diversity of viewpoints presented in
the broadcast media."
Out of the seven TV channels, three granted Sarkisian most of the airtime.On
the Second Armenian TV Channel, he received 66 percent of the total airtime;
he received 56 percent on Kentron and 53 percent on Shant. According to the
report, Sarkisian's airtime on the Second Armenian TV Channel, Kentron,
Shant and Armenia TV, even taking into account the execution of his official
duties, exceeded the limit.
In contrast to positive or neutral coverage of Sarkisian's campaign,
Ter-Petrossian "was regularly portrayed in a negative light."
The two radio channels that were observed presented Sarkisian merely as a
candidate rather than the current Prime Minister. The report showed that the
Public Radio of Armenia "was, in general, more balanced in the amount of
time allocated to prospective candidates than [were] TV channels." The
coverage of candidates by the Armenian Service of RFE/RL "included greater
diversity in their coverage," the report read.
-------------------------------------------- -----------------------------
3. Picking a Pair of Presidents
By Garen Yegparian
Super Tuesday was and wasn't.
It wasn't super in that we still don't know who the Democratic Party's
nominee will be. That outcome will be a grueling battle between Hillary
Clinton and Barack Obama. As I've pointed out in the past, organization
wins. Hillary has a better campaign organization. On the Republican side,
prevailing wisdom and arithmetic both indicate that McCain will be the
nominee (eight years late, after Shrub used very dirty tactics against him
in the 2000 race). However, the religious wing-nuts that put Shrub in office
can't be discounted, and they despise McCain. What this portends is hard to
tell, not just leading up to the formal nomination but afterwards, during
the general election campaign. Will they suck it up and support the
Republican candidate, or rather more accurately, oppose the Democratic
candidate? Or, will they stick to their our-way-or-the-highway approach and
effectively sit this one out, having grown arrogant and spoiled after three
decades of victories on their terms?
It was super to anyone that values a democracy and a real competition for
the prize. I hasten to note that the differences among the many candidates
within each party are not vast, in most cases, but what little exists is
being better presented and emphasized. The indeterminate outcome is also
great news for the voters of the 28 remaining jurisdictions in which either
or both parties have yet to hold their primaries/caucuses; the latest ones
will be held June 3.
It is unfortunate that both Republicans and Democrats are down to only two
serious candidates. This will result in a less explicit measure of the
country's attitudes and opinions. Why? Because, many of the candidates that
have dropped out (though their names will no doubt appear on the ballots of
states elections coming soon) stand for much more progressive (on the
Democratic side) or reactionary (on the Republican side) positions. Each had
selected a niche, an assemblage of issues s/he was campaigning on. Now,
smudged platitudes will emanate in ever greater proportion from the mouths
of two remaining significant candidates on each side.
More pertinent to Armenians in the U.S. is the greater number and deeper
engagement of our community's members in some of the candidates' campaigns.
Being plugged in this way, whether a given candidate wins or loses,
heightens our visibility and increases our ability to progress towards
addressing issues of concern to Armenians.
Now the grind will continue, state by state. We can only hope that ever
clearer pictures of where each of the candidates stand will emerge between
now and June 3. But all this is nothing compared to what I promised to
address in my previous primary-related article. I claimed then, and still
do, that the absence of an "obvious" candidate and the much more real race
consequently provoked is a fantastic argument for publicly financed
campaigns. Sneer as you wish, but this is true.
Didn't you appreciate the broader spectrum of policy positions and
characters seen and heard on the dais? Wasn't the exchange of opinions among
the candidates itself informative? Didn't you feel more empowered by the (at
least apparent) existence of greater choice? All this and other aspects of
the current race you'd likely label as positive attributes would become
regular features under a publicly financed campaign system. With the ability
to properly fund his/her effort, a candidate could focus on the policies
s/he espouses and getting the word out to the voters. A broader range and
more explicit presentations of policies would be presented to the voter
since money would not be a defining, exclusionary factor. At any time, more
candidates would be up on the dais, having first demonstrated some
reasonable level of public support-a minimum number of signatures on a
nominating petition and small-sum contributors. A few states already have
such systems in place. Support such proposals where you live, it'll improve
the quality of your life and community.
But long before the U.S. picks its pres, a third of a planet away, Armenia
will have done so. There, two candidates are front runners. In a more
rational system than exists in the U.S., the selection of each party's
standard bearer is accomplished by the party organization. The cost of this
part of the presidential election process is not foisted onto the state,
hence the public, as it is in the U.S. through the "primary" system. Thus
the two stages of the election in Armenia are designed to narrow the field
of candidates representing different parties down to two. Of course it's
even possible that people will elect a president with 50 percent +1 votes in
the first round.
Unfortunately, while Armenia's two-stage system is more rational, its
candidates are not. Those who actually bring the hope of something better
for the country don't have much of a chance against the two leading
candidates. One represents a continuation of the current corrupt regime. The
other is the same man who laid the groundwork for the current corrupt
regime, and, to boot, almost sold out the country before he was politely
toppled. Some choice our compatriots have! It doesn't help that the diaspora
is excluded from the balloting. The votes of Armenians throughout the world
could level the playing field against those who, using money and state
power, win office through less-than-clean elections. Diasporan electoral
participation would also further and more deeply engage all children of the
Armenian nation in the Republic of Armenia's future.
We'll know a lot more in a few weeks about both countries' choices and
fates. Remain engaged in both sets of elections and keep building Armenian
political power worldwide. It's the only route to the achievement of our
national goals.
80 Bigelow Avenue
Watertown MA 02472 USA
(617) 926-3974
[email protected]
http://www.a rmenianweekly.com
The Armenian Weekly; Volume 74, No. 6; Feb. 16, 2008
Commentary and Analysis:
1. To Believe or Not to Believe
By Zara Sargsyan
2. Armenian Elects President on Feb. 19
By Zaruhi Shushanian
3. Picking a Pair of Presidents
By Garen Yegparian
***
1. To Believe or Not to Believe
By Zara Sargsyan
The pre-election campaigns currently under way in Armenia are reminiscent of
incidents of mass hysteria. One of the Presidential candidates reads
Charents poems at rallies, while another boasts that he does not need the
poetry of Charents because he himself is the author of many works. Some are
supporting their candidate by organizing a dance at the Armenia Marriott
Hotel's Tigran the Great Hall, and amid all this, the citizens of Armenia,
tired of the songs, dances and poetry, are faced with questions like: To
believe or not to believe? Who to believe?
Promises, Platforms and Boasting
The candidates are generous in their promises. They start their speeches by
saying, "I am not giving promises," only to continue and say that they will
reduce taxes, increase salaries and pensions, provide housing and cars to
families with many children, resolve the Artsakh issue, alleviate corruption
and punish the current authorities. Among all these promises, perhaps the
one that captures one's attention most is "punishing the current
authorities." At the rallies of Armenia's first president Levon
Ter-Petrossian, we hear "Serjig go away!" and "Levon, Levon!" But what is
strikingly different in Ter-Petrossian's rallies today is the absence of the
spirit that was present in rallies in the late 1980s, when he had around him
figures symbolizing the national independence movement like Baruyr
Hayrikian, Vazgen Manougian, Silva Gaboudigian, Zori Balayan and thousands
of other intellectuals and political figures. Today, the people standing
next to him do not inspire trust. Many of them planted and nourished the
seeds of today's corruption during the years of Pan-Armenian National
Movement's reign. He is surrounded by people whose promises of punishing the
authorities are based exclusively on personal grudges. Hence, only very few
believe in the nobility of their aspirations.
At the same time, Serge Sarkisian, laying claim to all the victories of the
past decade and turning a blind eye to all the shortcomings of that period,
promises to lead the people "towards a baregetsik [rich, prosperous]
Armenia." This reminds us of the saying about lovers, "He promises the
impossible and doesn't deliver even the possible." I cannot see how one can
consider the building of a corrupt state system an accomplishment.
In this election, the position of the ARF candidate Vahan Hovannesian is
very solid. It is expected that the ARF will receive all the votes of its
solid base. Their chances could have been even higher had they not
associated themselves with the executive branch of the government. Their
association with the Republican party might prove to be a shortcoming to the
ARF candidate. Some also consider their criticism of the authorities not
very convincing and hence damaging to Hovannesian's prospects.
The candidates themselves insist that their programs and platforms have been
crafted with a high level of experimental and analytical approach. The
platform of Artur Baghdasaryan promises an unprecedented increase in
salaries and pensions after his proposed tax reductions. The "ararman
dzrakir" (the creation plan) ofArdashes Keghamian has become a bestseller,
while Dikran Karapetian actually announced that since there is the Bible, he
does not need an election platform...
Polls and Favorites
According to several polls, Sarkisian leads the race with a large margin
followed by Ter-Petrossian. Neither the authorities nor the opposition
doubts these predictions since these results seem to be convenient and
beneficial for both. When the prevailing atmosphere is that only these two
candidates have a chance to win, it will be easier to hunt for votes by the
ensuing panic. In such an atmosphere, those who have not yet decided who
>From the opposition they are going to vote for, would tend to vote for
Ter-Petrossian simply because they are opposed to Sarkisian. Similarly, the
portion of society that remembers all too well the woes of Armenia during
the presidency of Ter-Petrossian would vote for Sarkisian simply to avoid a
repetition of that era.
The active participation of observers from international organizations in
the election monitoring process does not guarantee democratic elections.
Democratic elections are possible when the people consciously vote for a
certain candidate, not against a candidate. The majority of voters in
Armenia will go to the polls not to express their will (gamk) but their
dismay (tjgamoutyoun). Hopelessness is a serious impediment on the road to
democracy. The voters are guided by the principle of electing the lesser of
two evils.
Election bribes are also a serious threat to the election process and amid
the pre-election confusion, we often hear about people giving bribes and
collecting personal information in return. This led the president of the
Central Electoral Committee to make a public statement that "giving away
personal information in no way affects the results of elections. However, I
call upon you not to give your personal information to anyone."
In this atmosphere, a portion of the electorate is actively participating in
their favored candidate's campaign, rallying for him and against his
opponent(s), while the other portion of voters is trying to find an answer
to the questions: To believe or not to believe? Who to believe?
And all voters, in their hearts, are wishing to see the name of Dikran the
Great on the ballot paper, in realization of their dream of a prosperous
Armenia, extending from sea to sea...
------------------------------------------- -------------------------------
2. Armenian Elects President on Feb. 19
By Zaruhi Shushanian
On Feb. 19, the 18 year-old Republic of Armenia (RA) will elect its third
president. For a country with a young democracy, the upcoming presidential
election is of crucial importance. The future of a country with closed
borders, its developing economy and the resolution of the Karabakh conflict
are at stake.
Nine Candidates
Nine candidates have been nominated by the RA Central Electoral Commission.
They are: Serge Sarkisian, RA Prime Minister and leader of the Republican
Party of Armenia; Vazgen Manukyan, former Prime Minister of Armenia and
leader of the National Democratic Union; Vahan Hovhannesian, deputy speaker
of the RA Parliament and member of the ARF-Dashnaktsutyun; Arthur
Baghdasaryan, leader of the Orinats Yerkir (State of Law) Party; Levon
Ter-Petrossian, leader of the Armenian National Movement opposition party);
Artashes Geghamian, leader of the National Unity Party; Tigran Karapetian,
leader of the Peoples' Party of Armenia and president of ALM (Alternative
Mass Media); Aram Harutyunian, head of the National Consent Party and
professor at Yerevan State University; and Arman Melikyan, former advisor to
the NKR President.
Long before the race officially began, some Armenian newspapers (mostly
opposition ones) talked about the possibility that certain candidates would
joining forces. None of the candidates, however, have removed their
candidacy bid so far.
Though the nine candidates constantly repeat their I-am-sure-of-my-victory
phrases, only a few of them have a clear lead over their rivals, judging
>From public polls and the number of citizens who have come out to support
both candidates during their rallies. They are Sarkisian, Ter-Petrossian as
well as Hovhannesian and Baghdasaryan.
According to the Haikakan Zhamanak (Armenian Times) Daily, the authorities
give a high approval rating to Baghdasaryan in "biased polls." It suits them
well to see Baghdasaryan in the second possible round, as it would guarantee
Serge Sarkisian's victory. However, the newspaper refrains from forecasting
the results of the February election, which "totally differs from the
preceding ones."
Baghdasaryan has suggested that his rivals form at least one unified
election campaign office in each region a week before the election. "We have
received positive feedback on this issue, and at present we are negotiating
with the representatives of the other candidates' election campaign offices
to work together for a free and transparent election," said Hovhannes
Margarian, a member of Orinats Yerkir.
What makes Hovhannesian stand out is that his election program and
approaches that are employed by candiates for office in democratic countries
in the West. He believes Armenia is governed by strong economic clans formed
after privatization in the 1990s. And "these clans have swallowed the
political power," he was quoted as saying.
The ARF candidate has signed over 170,000 agreements with citizens,
containing a summary of his program and the expectations of his electorate.
Any citizen who voluntarily signs the agreement gets a special card and
joins the candidate's election campaign.
Candidates Geghamian and Manukyan both have considerable experience in
participatng in elections and have their own viewpoints on the future
development of Armenia.
This time, he's not organizing rallies in Yerevan and Armenia's regions, as
most of his rivals do. Manukyan only uses his airtime to introduce his
election program and objectives. His slogan is: "To change, not to
tolerate."
Geghamian has made the most radical and offensive statements concerning his
rivals. During his rally held on Jan. 28, or Army Day, he blamed slain Prime
Minister Vazgen Sarkisian's brother Aram Sarkisian (who supports Levon
Ter-Petrossian) and his family for sowing anarchy in Armenia. Geghamian even
used offensive words when referring to Aram Sarkisian. Some local
organizations, including the Yerkrapah Kamavors (freedom fighters),
condemned the candidate's behavior.
According to the Aravot (Morning) Daily's poll conducted in December 2007,
Geghamian will be able to capture about five percent of the vote.
Karapetian believes he is the only candidate who can "offer an alternative
solution to all problems in the country."
Melikyan, in contrast to some of his rivals who are for the compromise
settlement of the Karabakh conflict, does not approve of any compromise and
or negotiations with Azerbaijan.
According to the Gallup Poll, Melikyan and Harutyunyan would earn less than
two percent of the vote in the February election.
Polls
On the initiative of the U.S. Gallup Organization, the Armenian Sociological
Association conducted a poll to gauge public opinion on the presidential
candidates. The poll was sponsored by the International Republican Institute
(IRI).
On Feb. 6, the A1 Plus Daily published an article claiming that the public
poll had nothing to do with Gallup and IRI. According to the source, IRI
representatives lack the authority to survey the rating of Presidential
candidates during the race. A1 Plus claims that the poll was instead taken
by a Lithuanian citizen named Rasa Alisausiene, who is "neither a Gallup
scientist nor expert." Instead, she is the president of Baltic Surveys Ltd.,
which has recently been cooperating with Gallup.
A1 Plus quotes an article published on Gallup's official website and in the
Harvard International Review-titled "Gallup Exclusive: Conflict in the
Caucasus: New Surveys on Azerbaijan-Armenia"-which estimates that 83 percent
of Armenians are dissatisfied with Prime Minister Serge Sarkisian's
policies.
According to Stepan Safarian, a member of the Zharangutyun (Heritage) Party,
Sarkisian's rating has dropped recently. In a poll taken by Aharon Adibekian's
Sociometer Free Sociological Centre last month, Sarkisian enjoyed 67 percent
of public support; yet, according to the Populus British Sociological
Company, the his rating was at 50.7 percent, explains Safarian.
By the end of this week, the Zharangutyun Party will announce who they are
going to support in the upcoming Presidential elections.
Ter-Petrossian Applies to Consitutional Court
On Feb. 8, Levon Ter-Petrossian applied to the RA Constitutional Court,
claiming obstacles were being placed against his election campaign.
Particularly, the Haylur news program (broadcast on the Public Television of
Armenia) has been propagandizing against Ter-Petrossian for the past three
months, he said, thus violating Articles 18, 20 and 22 of the RA Electoral
Code, as well as Articles 11 and 28 of the Law on Television and Radio. He
said it was the first time a Presidential candidate in Armenia is not able
to carry out his campaign on equal terms with his rivals.
According to Article 52, if insurmountable obstacles are made for a
candidate, the election wil be postponed for two weeks. If the obstacles are
not removed by the end of those two weeks, a new election is held after 40
days.
The Constitutional Court dismissed Ter-Petrossian's claim on Feb. 11.
OSCE/ODIHR Mission's Interim Report
In a December 2007 letter to RA Minister of Foreign Affairs Vartan Oskanian,
OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe) representative
Miklos Haraszti wrote: "The recent cases of harassment and violence against
independent and opposition media have contributed to an atmosphere of
intimidation and fear in the journalistic community in Armenia."
On Jan. 30, the OSCE/ODIHR (Office for Democratic Institutions and Human
Rights) Mission released the first interim report on the elections. The
mission observed local media coverage of the race from Jan. 11-20, closely
monitoring seven TV channels (the First Channel of the Public Television of
Armenia, "ALM," "Armenia," Second Armenian TV Channel, Kentron, Shant and
Yerkir Media); two radio channels (Public Radio of Armenia and Armenian
Service of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty); and daily newspapers (Hayastani
Hanrapetutiun, Aravot, Azg and Haikakan Zhamanak).
According to their conclusions, before the official campaign kicked off on
Jan. 21, "most of the broadcast media, including public television,
demonstrated a clear imbalance in their coverage of the prospective
candidates."
"Television is the most important information source for citizens," read the
report. "Despite the relatively high number of media outlets in Armenia, the
international organizations dealing with freedom of expression, including
OSCE, have previously noted a lack of diversity of viewpoints presented in
the broadcast media."
Out of the seven TV channels, three granted Sarkisian most of the airtime.On
the Second Armenian TV Channel, he received 66 percent of the total airtime;
he received 56 percent on Kentron and 53 percent on Shant. According to the
report, Sarkisian's airtime on the Second Armenian TV Channel, Kentron,
Shant and Armenia TV, even taking into account the execution of his official
duties, exceeded the limit.
In contrast to positive or neutral coverage of Sarkisian's campaign,
Ter-Petrossian "was regularly portrayed in a negative light."
The two radio channels that were observed presented Sarkisian merely as a
candidate rather than the current Prime Minister. The report showed that the
Public Radio of Armenia "was, in general, more balanced in the amount of
time allocated to prospective candidates than [were] TV channels." The
coverage of candidates by the Armenian Service of RFE/RL "included greater
diversity in their coverage," the report read.
-------------------------------------------- -----------------------------
3. Picking a Pair of Presidents
By Garen Yegparian
Super Tuesday was and wasn't.
It wasn't super in that we still don't know who the Democratic Party's
nominee will be. That outcome will be a grueling battle between Hillary
Clinton and Barack Obama. As I've pointed out in the past, organization
wins. Hillary has a better campaign organization. On the Republican side,
prevailing wisdom and arithmetic both indicate that McCain will be the
nominee (eight years late, after Shrub used very dirty tactics against him
in the 2000 race). However, the religious wing-nuts that put Shrub in office
can't be discounted, and they despise McCain. What this portends is hard to
tell, not just leading up to the formal nomination but afterwards, during
the general election campaign. Will they suck it up and support the
Republican candidate, or rather more accurately, oppose the Democratic
candidate? Or, will they stick to their our-way-or-the-highway approach and
effectively sit this one out, having grown arrogant and spoiled after three
decades of victories on their terms?
It was super to anyone that values a democracy and a real competition for
the prize. I hasten to note that the differences among the many candidates
within each party are not vast, in most cases, but what little exists is
being better presented and emphasized. The indeterminate outcome is also
great news for the voters of the 28 remaining jurisdictions in which either
or both parties have yet to hold their primaries/caucuses; the latest ones
will be held June 3.
It is unfortunate that both Republicans and Democrats are down to only two
serious candidates. This will result in a less explicit measure of the
country's attitudes and opinions. Why? Because, many of the candidates that
have dropped out (though their names will no doubt appear on the ballots of
states elections coming soon) stand for much more progressive (on the
Democratic side) or reactionary (on the Republican side) positions. Each had
selected a niche, an assemblage of issues s/he was campaigning on. Now,
smudged platitudes will emanate in ever greater proportion from the mouths
of two remaining significant candidates on each side.
More pertinent to Armenians in the U.S. is the greater number and deeper
engagement of our community's members in some of the candidates' campaigns.
Being plugged in this way, whether a given candidate wins or loses,
heightens our visibility and increases our ability to progress towards
addressing issues of concern to Armenians.
Now the grind will continue, state by state. We can only hope that ever
clearer pictures of where each of the candidates stand will emerge between
now and June 3. But all this is nothing compared to what I promised to
address in my previous primary-related article. I claimed then, and still
do, that the absence of an "obvious" candidate and the much more real race
consequently provoked is a fantastic argument for publicly financed
campaigns. Sneer as you wish, but this is true.
Didn't you appreciate the broader spectrum of policy positions and
characters seen and heard on the dais? Wasn't the exchange of opinions among
the candidates itself informative? Didn't you feel more empowered by the (at
least apparent) existence of greater choice? All this and other aspects of
the current race you'd likely label as positive attributes would become
regular features under a publicly financed campaign system. With the ability
to properly fund his/her effort, a candidate could focus on the policies
s/he espouses and getting the word out to the voters. A broader range and
more explicit presentations of policies would be presented to the voter
since money would not be a defining, exclusionary factor. At any time, more
candidates would be up on the dais, having first demonstrated some
reasonable level of public support-a minimum number of signatures on a
nominating petition and small-sum contributors. A few states already have
such systems in place. Support such proposals where you live, it'll improve
the quality of your life and community.
But long before the U.S. picks its pres, a third of a planet away, Armenia
will have done so. There, two candidates are front runners. In a more
rational system than exists in the U.S., the selection of each party's
standard bearer is accomplished by the party organization. The cost of this
part of the presidential election process is not foisted onto the state,
hence the public, as it is in the U.S. through the "primary" system. Thus
the two stages of the election in Armenia are designed to narrow the field
of candidates representing different parties down to two. Of course it's
even possible that people will elect a president with 50 percent +1 votes in
the first round.
Unfortunately, while Armenia's two-stage system is more rational, its
candidates are not. Those who actually bring the hope of something better
for the country don't have much of a chance against the two leading
candidates. One represents a continuation of the current corrupt regime. The
other is the same man who laid the groundwork for the current corrupt
regime, and, to boot, almost sold out the country before he was politely
toppled. Some choice our compatriots have! It doesn't help that the diaspora
is excluded from the balloting. The votes of Armenians throughout the world
could level the playing field against those who, using money and state
power, win office through less-than-clean elections. Diasporan electoral
participation would also further and more deeply engage all children of the
Armenian nation in the Republic of Armenia's future.
We'll know a lot more in a few weeks about both countries' choices and
fates. Remain engaged in both sets of elections and keep building Armenian
political power worldwide. It's the only route to the achievement of our
national goals.