Tweet
Kommersant, Russia
Dec 6 2007
Predecessor vs Successor Post-Soviet Dilemma
The start of the election campaign in Armenia was not promising any
serious competition. But Mr. Ter-Petrosyan, who has been keeping low
profile for a while, has joined the presidential race and brought in
some spark.
Blistering speeches of the ex-president, who paid a dear price for
his intentions for a compromise on the Nagorno Karabakh issue, have
lit the fire. He even tried to use to his advantage the tragedy in
the Armenian Parliament on October 27, 1999 that claimed lives of
several prominent politicians. It would have been too reckless to
name the incumbent leadership responsible as it would be fraught with
defamation. But Mr. Ter-Petrosyan said that the current `criminal
system of power' is rooted in October 27, 1999, and he went on to
blast authorities for failing to solve the crime. The implication is
clear. The presidential contender hinted that he would have found the
people before the terrorist attack if he were in power. This has so
far been his main election promise.
In any case, tension is mounting in Armenia, and some analysts cite
quite dramatic scenarios. But several questions crop up. First, can
Serzh Sarkisyan be considered clearly pro-Russian and Mr.
Ter-Petrosyan pro-Western? On the one hand, Mr. Sarkisyan is a
successor of the Armenian course towards a strategic alliance with
Russia while several people close to Mr. Ter-Petrosyan have spoken
for Armenia joining the NATO or even deploying U.S. missile defense
facilities, which can be interpreted as clearly anti-Russian
rhetoric. On the other hand, it was the originally West-friendly Mr.
Ter-Petrosyan who signed a treaty with Russia. Meanwhile, the ruling
Republican party has recently started to pay a lot of attention to
relations with the West and NATO. In other words, any Armenian leader
would like to improve relations with the West and no leader would
choose to spoil relations with Russia.
The second question is what chances the contenders have. Naturally,
Robert Kocharyan's successor has an edge but Armenia has a large
number of voters who are ready to oppose authorities. But will the
former president succeed in uniting all opposition forces around him?
Many experts believe that his figure would put off most voters who
blame the ex-president for the dreadful social and economic crisis in
the 1990s and unpopular plans to solve the Nagorno Karabakh issue by
a compromise with Azerbaijan. But some think that Mr. Ter-Petrosyan
may score high since people are tired of incumbent authorities who
are often regarded as corrupt, authoritarian, favoring nepotism and
having little connection with people's needs. In any case, Armenia's
next president is going to have to do a lot to win people's trust.
Vitaly Naumkin, president of the Center for Strategic and Political Research
Dec 6 2007
Predecessor vs Successor Post-Soviet Dilemma
The start of the election campaign in Armenia was not promising any
serious competition. But Mr. Ter-Petrosyan, who has been keeping low
profile for a while, has joined the presidential race and brought in
some spark.
Blistering speeches of the ex-president, who paid a dear price for
his intentions for a compromise on the Nagorno Karabakh issue, have
lit the fire. He even tried to use to his advantage the tragedy in
the Armenian Parliament on October 27, 1999 that claimed lives of
several prominent politicians. It would have been too reckless to
name the incumbent leadership responsible as it would be fraught with
defamation. But Mr. Ter-Petrosyan said that the current `criminal
system of power' is rooted in October 27, 1999, and he went on to
blast authorities for failing to solve the crime. The implication is
clear. The presidential contender hinted that he would have found the
people before the terrorist attack if he were in power. This has so
far been his main election promise.
In any case, tension is mounting in Armenia, and some analysts cite
quite dramatic scenarios. But several questions crop up. First, can
Serzh Sarkisyan be considered clearly pro-Russian and Mr.
Ter-Petrosyan pro-Western? On the one hand, Mr. Sarkisyan is a
successor of the Armenian course towards a strategic alliance with
Russia while several people close to Mr. Ter-Petrosyan have spoken
for Armenia joining the NATO or even deploying U.S. missile defense
facilities, which can be interpreted as clearly anti-Russian
rhetoric. On the other hand, it was the originally West-friendly Mr.
Ter-Petrosyan who signed a treaty with Russia. Meanwhile, the ruling
Republican party has recently started to pay a lot of attention to
relations with the West and NATO. In other words, any Armenian leader
would like to improve relations with the West and no leader would
choose to spoil relations with Russia.
The second question is what chances the contenders have. Naturally,
Robert Kocharyan's successor has an edge but Armenia has a large
number of voters who are ready to oppose authorities. But will the
former president succeed in uniting all opposition forces around him?
Many experts believe that his figure would put off most voters who
blame the ex-president for the dreadful social and economic crisis in
the 1990s and unpopular plans to solve the Nagorno Karabakh issue by
a compromise with Azerbaijan. But some think that Mr. Ter-Petrosyan
may score high since people are tired of incumbent authorities who
are often regarded as corrupt, authoritarian, favoring nepotism and
having little connection with people's needs. In any case, Armenia's
next president is going to have to do a lot to win people's trust.
Vitaly Naumkin, president of the Center for Strategic and Political Research