Tweet
How Much Is Armenian Election?
JAMES HAKOBYAN
15:49 14/12/2012
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/comments/view/28419
Visiting the United States, Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan met with
the chief executive officer of the MCC Daniel Yohannes. During this
meeting, as the official message runs, they discussed the issues of
cooperation with Armenia.
Although there are no details, it is beyond doubt that these prospects
will depend on the presidential election and the post-electoral
situation. If Armenia is able to hold a quiet election and prevent
post-election tension, the MCC will most probably resume its programs
in Armenia.
Armenia was one of the first beneficiaries of this American
corporation. During George Bush Jr.'s term, the U.S. government
considered that Armenia met the benchmarks of the corporation and
launched a program in 2006 worth 235 million dollars. This money was
to be spent on rural infrastructures, roads, irrigations systems and
so on. In addition, the MCC money is a grant, not a loan.
However, in 2008 the presidential election changed everything. The
United States announced that Armenia had departed from the benchmarks.
The reason was the crackdown on the opposition, infringements of the
freedom of press and speech following March 1. The program was cut by
70 million dollars.
Interesting was the response of the ex-president Robert Kocharyan to
the John Danilovich, the ex-CEO of MCC. Kocharyan stated that Armenia
does not worry about the discontinued program because it has enough
money to continue the activities.
Such answers are logical in case someone gives money to Armenia and
demands steps which threaten the sovereignty and security of the
country. However, the benchmarks set by the MCC threaten neither
sovereignty, nor security of Armenia. They require economic and
political freedoms which are already set out in the Constitution and
legislation of Armenia.
Under these circumstances perhaps it is better for the state not to
lose the gift money and if it also can raise money, it had better
extend the programs. After all, it looks like several hundreds of
millions are paid in return for observing the RA Constitution. This is
by the way.
In 2011 MCC programs were discontinued in Armenia unlike Georgia. The
continuation of the program will depend on the elections in 2012 and
2013. 2012 was overcome successfully and quietly. Such will be 2013.
At least, the fact that Gagik Tsarukyan withdrew from the race and
thwarted the joint front is evidence to this. On the other hand, the
government sees danger coming from Levon Ter-Petrosyan. Certainly, the
ANC leader does not stand a chance to prevent electoral fraud, he may
cause post-electoral tension and shadow the impression. Moreover,
Ter-Petrosyan is good at the tactics of moderate tension or
controllable tension, and in case he runs in the election, that will
be his only tool.
Apparently, this is the reason why the government is interested in
Levon Ter-Petrosyan's withdrawal following Tsarukyan's example.
Perhaps in this case the program of MCC will be guaranteed to the
government of Armenia.
Although, the problem of the government is not the MCC. The EU has
postponed the donor conference and the condition is compliant
presidential elections. This is very important for the Armenian
government because additional money is avital need for the economy.
On the other hand, there will not be a complete lack of money if the
election is held `as always'. The West will continue the dripping
method which is not enough for Armenia to develop but helps avoid
social riot. The West will not waste the money. It has said `more for
more'.
The Armenian government is sure that the presidential election will
have some value, at least the costs will be covered. It will try to
raise the price to sell it more expensively to the West to have some
`profit' as well.
JAMES HAKOBYAN
15:49 14/12/2012
Story from Lragir.am News:
http://www.lragir.am/index.php/eng/0/comments/view/28419
Visiting the United States, Prime Minister Tigran Sargsyan met with
the chief executive officer of the MCC Daniel Yohannes. During this
meeting, as the official message runs, they discussed the issues of
cooperation with Armenia.
Although there are no details, it is beyond doubt that these prospects
will depend on the presidential election and the post-electoral
situation. If Armenia is able to hold a quiet election and prevent
post-election tension, the MCC will most probably resume its programs
in Armenia.
Armenia was one of the first beneficiaries of this American
corporation. During George Bush Jr.'s term, the U.S. government
considered that Armenia met the benchmarks of the corporation and
launched a program in 2006 worth 235 million dollars. This money was
to be spent on rural infrastructures, roads, irrigations systems and
so on. In addition, the MCC money is a grant, not a loan.
However, in 2008 the presidential election changed everything. The
United States announced that Armenia had departed from the benchmarks.
The reason was the crackdown on the opposition, infringements of the
freedom of press and speech following March 1. The program was cut by
70 million dollars.
Interesting was the response of the ex-president Robert Kocharyan to
the John Danilovich, the ex-CEO of MCC. Kocharyan stated that Armenia
does not worry about the discontinued program because it has enough
money to continue the activities.
Such answers are logical in case someone gives money to Armenia and
demands steps which threaten the sovereignty and security of the
country. However, the benchmarks set by the MCC threaten neither
sovereignty, nor security of Armenia. They require economic and
political freedoms which are already set out in the Constitution and
legislation of Armenia.
Under these circumstances perhaps it is better for the state not to
lose the gift money and if it also can raise money, it had better
extend the programs. After all, it looks like several hundreds of
millions are paid in return for observing the RA Constitution. This is
by the way.
In 2011 MCC programs were discontinued in Armenia unlike Georgia. The
continuation of the program will depend on the elections in 2012 and
2013. 2012 was overcome successfully and quietly. Such will be 2013.
At least, the fact that Gagik Tsarukyan withdrew from the race and
thwarted the joint front is evidence to this. On the other hand, the
government sees danger coming from Levon Ter-Petrosyan. Certainly, the
ANC leader does not stand a chance to prevent electoral fraud, he may
cause post-electoral tension and shadow the impression. Moreover,
Ter-Petrosyan is good at the tactics of moderate tension or
controllable tension, and in case he runs in the election, that will
be his only tool.
Apparently, this is the reason why the government is interested in
Levon Ter-Petrosyan's withdrawal following Tsarukyan's example.
Perhaps in this case the program of MCC will be guaranteed to the
government of Armenia.
Although, the problem of the government is not the MCC. The EU has
postponed the donor conference and the condition is compliant
presidential elections. This is very important for the Armenian
government because additional money is avital need for the economy.
On the other hand, there will not be a complete lack of money if the
election is held `as always'. The West will continue the dripping
method which is not enough for Armenia to develop but helps avoid
social riot. The West will not waste the money. It has said `more for
more'.
The Armenian government is sure that the presidential election will
have some value, at least the costs will be covered. It will try to
raise the price to sell it more expensively to the West to have some
`profit' as well.