Tweet
ARMENIAN ELECTION: "STAKES COULD NOT BE HIGHER"
By Richard Giragosian
Institute for War and Peace Reporting
CAUCASUS REPORTING SERVICE, No. 639
May 4, 2012
UK
Politicians must restore slipping public confidence through fair
elections and commitment to reform.
As Armenians prepare to go to the polls on May 6 to elect a new
parliament, the stakes could hardly be higher. This election is one
of the biggest challenges the current government has faced, for two
main reasons.
First, the public as a whole has become noticeably less apathetic,
and expects this election to be run significantly better than previous
ones. This does not necessarily mean people believe the government's
pledge of a free and fair vote, but it is clear that most want to
hold officials to that promise.
This election is also subject to a higher degree of international
scrutiny than before, as it is seen as test of the credibility of
President Serzh Sargsyan's administration, in terms both of his stated
commitment to democracy, and of his sincerity about delivering on
pledges he has made.
Another factor that makes this ballot particularly important is that
it is the first election since the February 2008 presidential contest,
which resulted in clashes between police and opposition supporters
that left at least ten people dead and many more injured.
So the forthcoming election offers an important opportunity for the
authorities to overcome the legacy of mistrust and of perceived lack
of legitimacy that has hung over Sargsyan's administration ever since
the crisis.
Unfortunately, however, neither the recent local elections nor
the statements coming from officials indicate that the government
realises how important this poll is. There are in fact few grounds
for confidence that the vote will meet people's expectations.
Nonetheless, the election reflects a major shift in Armenian politics.
Specifically, the traditional political model, defined by a conflict
between government and opposition, has changed, and the main dynamic is
the serious and deepening rivalry within the ruling coalition. This
unprecedented rift has even led to violence in the run-up to the
election.
The confrontation pits the ruling Republican Party, the country's
largest political party led by President Sargsyan, against its
erstwhile allies from Prosperous Armenia, a junior partner in the
governing coalition. Prosperous Armenia is led by businessman Gagik
Tsarukyan, a supporter and close associate of former President Robert
Kocharyan.
As the Republican Party attempts to weaken Prosperous Armenia during
campaigning, the conflict is escalating. The Republicans may still
hold the initiative and enjoy the incumbent's advantage of having
"administrative resources" at its disposal, but they are made
vulnerable by their over-confidence, exacerbated by a tendency to
underestimate their opponents.
Prosperous Armenia has yet to fight back or counter these moves. That
suggests that either its leadership has not yet decided on an effective
strategy for doing so, or that it is simply unable to respond.
The ruling elite will be further endangered if it ignores popular
demands for lasting change and real reforms.
If this election is not run better than previous flawed ballots, there
will be a price to pay. The potential consequences are not restricted
to international pressure and censure - there will be a reaction from
within Armenian society, which is displaying a more dynamic level
of civic activism on matters ranging from the environment to broader
issues of social inequality. Society has changed, and people are no
longer content to witness yet another round of flawed, fixed elections.
This simmering sense of frustration and discontent is rooted in more
than the denial of a real choice or voice in political life; it also
stems from years of widening wealth disparities and a pronounced lack
of economic opportunity for the average Armenian.
This undercurrent of discontent is increasing, especially as the
government can no longer claim to be presiding over the kind of
economic growth that it used in the past to justify shortcomings in
reform and democratisation. The true face of Armenia's economy has
been exposed - years of double-digit growth have resulted only in
glaringly obvious socioeconomic inequalities.
As well as creating divisions along social and economic lines,
the wealth and income disparities are geographic, as well. Economic
activity and opportunity are over-concentrated in the capital Yeravan
and other urban centres, creating an urban-rural divide and significant
regional imbalances. This is underlined by the wide variance in the
quality and accessibility of essential public services like health,
education and welfare.
Within this broader context, the more fundamental challenge to
stability in Armenia is the need for economic change and reform. But
unless this election is a great improvement on its predecessors,
the government that emerges from it will lack both a firm mandate to
lead and the political will to address these economic problems.
To achieve lasting stability and genuine legitimacy, this election
must be an opportunity for politicians to learn to govern and not
simply rule. If they miss that opportunity, what is now a crisis of
confidence could slide into a dangerously explosive situation.
Richard Giragosian is director of the Regional Studies Centre, an
independent think tank in Yerevan, Armenia
By Richard Giragosian
Institute for War and Peace Reporting
CAUCASUS REPORTING SERVICE, No. 639
May 4, 2012
UK
Politicians must restore slipping public confidence through fair
elections and commitment to reform.
As Armenians prepare to go to the polls on May 6 to elect a new
parliament, the stakes could hardly be higher. This election is one
of the biggest challenges the current government has faced, for two
main reasons.
First, the public as a whole has become noticeably less apathetic,
and expects this election to be run significantly better than previous
ones. This does not necessarily mean people believe the government's
pledge of a free and fair vote, but it is clear that most want to
hold officials to that promise.
This election is also subject to a higher degree of international
scrutiny than before, as it is seen as test of the credibility of
President Serzh Sargsyan's administration, in terms both of his stated
commitment to democracy, and of his sincerity about delivering on
pledges he has made.
Another factor that makes this ballot particularly important is that
it is the first election since the February 2008 presidential contest,
which resulted in clashes between police and opposition supporters
that left at least ten people dead and many more injured.
So the forthcoming election offers an important opportunity for the
authorities to overcome the legacy of mistrust and of perceived lack
of legitimacy that has hung over Sargsyan's administration ever since
the crisis.
Unfortunately, however, neither the recent local elections nor
the statements coming from officials indicate that the government
realises how important this poll is. There are in fact few grounds
for confidence that the vote will meet people's expectations.
Nonetheless, the election reflects a major shift in Armenian politics.
Specifically, the traditional political model, defined by a conflict
between government and opposition, has changed, and the main dynamic is
the serious and deepening rivalry within the ruling coalition. This
unprecedented rift has even led to violence in the run-up to the
election.
The confrontation pits the ruling Republican Party, the country's
largest political party led by President Sargsyan, against its
erstwhile allies from Prosperous Armenia, a junior partner in the
governing coalition. Prosperous Armenia is led by businessman Gagik
Tsarukyan, a supporter and close associate of former President Robert
Kocharyan.
As the Republican Party attempts to weaken Prosperous Armenia during
campaigning, the conflict is escalating. The Republicans may still
hold the initiative and enjoy the incumbent's advantage of having
"administrative resources" at its disposal, but they are made
vulnerable by their over-confidence, exacerbated by a tendency to
underestimate their opponents.
Prosperous Armenia has yet to fight back or counter these moves. That
suggests that either its leadership has not yet decided on an effective
strategy for doing so, or that it is simply unable to respond.
The ruling elite will be further endangered if it ignores popular
demands for lasting change and real reforms.
If this election is not run better than previous flawed ballots, there
will be a price to pay. The potential consequences are not restricted
to international pressure and censure - there will be a reaction from
within Armenian society, which is displaying a more dynamic level
of civic activism on matters ranging from the environment to broader
issues of social inequality. Society has changed, and people are no
longer content to witness yet another round of flawed, fixed elections.
This simmering sense of frustration and discontent is rooted in more
than the denial of a real choice or voice in political life; it also
stems from years of widening wealth disparities and a pronounced lack
of economic opportunity for the average Armenian.
This undercurrent of discontent is increasing, especially as the
government can no longer claim to be presiding over the kind of
economic growth that it used in the past to justify shortcomings in
reform and democratisation. The true face of Armenia's economy has
been exposed - years of double-digit growth have resulted only in
glaringly obvious socioeconomic inequalities.
As well as creating divisions along social and economic lines,
the wealth and income disparities are geographic, as well. Economic
activity and opportunity are over-concentrated in the capital Yeravan
and other urban centres, creating an urban-rural divide and significant
regional imbalances. This is underlined by the wide variance in the
quality and accessibility of essential public services like health,
education and welfare.
Within this broader context, the more fundamental challenge to
stability in Armenia is the need for economic change and reform. But
unless this election is a great improvement on its predecessors,
the government that emerges from it will lack both a firm mandate to
lead and the political will to address these economic problems.
To achieve lasting stability and genuine legitimacy, this election
must be an opportunity for politicians to learn to govern and not
simply rule. If they miss that opportunity, what is now a crisis of
confidence could slide into a dangerously explosive situation.
Richard Giragosian is director of the Regional Studies Centre, an
independent think tank in Yerevan, Armenia