Tweet
VOTE 2013: WEEK ONE UNEVENTFUL AND LIKELY PRECEDENT FOR REMAINDER OF CAMPAIGN
VOTE 2013 | 25.01.13 | 15:51
By GAYANE ABRAHAMYAN
ArmeniaNow reporter
Political analysts describe the first week of campaigning in Armenia's
presidential election as "quiet and uninteresting," which is unlikely
to break the indifference and distrust towards the electoral processes
rooted in the public.
Enlarge Photo
Shushan Khatlamajyan
Enlarge Photo
Alexander Iskandaryan
Enlarge Photo
Edgar Vardanyan
The situation created in Armenia when the second most powerful
political force (Prosperous Armenia Party) in the country quits the
race before its official start and the largest opposition force does
not field a candidate for the most important election (based on its
leader's age claim) is unclear not only to broad sections of the
Armenian public, but also to international observers and ambassadors.
The start of the campaign was marked by a controversial note made by
British Ambassador Catherine Leach on her personal blog. She described
it as "disappointing" that "three of the key non-government parties in
parliament are neither putting up a candidate of their own nor backing
any other." Her Majesty's ambassador meant the Prosperous Armenia
Party, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutyun) and
the Armenian National Congress, which made such decisions in December.
The election-related concerns voiced by the ambassador evoked a
critical reaction of the Armenian authorities some of whom went as far
as qualifying it as interference in Armenia's domestic affairs by a
representative of a foreign state. But in reality the ambassador did
not raise any issue that would not be of concern to any local resident.
Meanwhile, the main question concerning the ongoing election campaign
is whether it is a true competition of ideas and platforms or a
'staged' event, an event during which the main discussion is going
around not those taking part in it, but those not participating.
Political analysts believe that the current president will have
no problem getting reelected and that his main challenge will be
motivating people to go to the polls, but they do not agree with the
qualifications that the current election is "noncompetitive".
"What does a noncompetitive election mean? There is a competition
going on, simply it is not against Serzh Sargsyan, but among the other
candidates, for example, [Heritage party leader] Raffi Hovannisian,
[Liberty party leader] Hrant Bagratyan, [National Self-Determination
Union chairman] Paruyr Hayrikyan. They are competing for the voter,"
says director of the Yerevan-based Caucasus Institute Alexander
Iskandaryan.
According to Iskandaryan, politicians are taking part in the
presidential election not only to become presidents, but for other
purposes as well.
"Their participation addresses other issues - ensure their political
presence, make it more prominent, mobilize their electorate for further
campaigns, or to simply become known by public," says Iskandaryan,
assuring that it's normal and is a common practice in many countries.
Expert Shushan Khatlamajyan, project coordinator at Civil Society and
Regional Institute, believes that "the campaign is fully adequate to
the political and social situation in the country and the opposition's
backing down half-way was to be expected and a natural thing to
happen".
"It's very easy to be oppositional, when the main requirement is
speaking, even if with facts, but as soon as it comes to actions,
they realize they can't offer anything new, the re-branding of former
authorities [the reference is to first president Levon Ter-Petrosyan
now leading oppositional Armenian National Congress) was unsuccessful
and soon lost its influence," she told ArmeniaNow.
Khatlamajyan believes that the lack of competition is the result
of not only the monopolization of the political field, but also the
opposition's strategic mistakes.
Last week President Sargsyan said in an interview to RFE/RL that
"it is not the authorities' job to cultivate and nurture opponents. I
believe that the authorities' duty is to create a competitive field,
competitive atmosphere." And he believes it has been "accomplished".
Meanwhile political analyst Edgar Vardanyan from the Armenian Center
for National and International Studies (ACNIS) says "it is simply
unacceptable to speak about a competitive field when we are dealing
with clan agreements and showdowns".
Nonetheless, Vardanyan is convinced that regardless of everything "the
participation of the oppositional forces in the elections wouldn't
have made a difference given the current situation".
"I disagree with the speculations and opinions that their refusal to
participate has made the elections uncompetitive. Considering the
public attitude of late towards these political forces, I can say
that even in theory their participation couldn't have stirred strong
civil movement," says Vadanyan.
As an important characteristic of this campaign, the analyst points
out Sargsyan's new strategy: rather than using black PR and criticism
against his opponents, the president is using pro-establishment
media to picture them as "not serious, uninformed, or, as people say,
simpletons", while there are candidates among them who have taken a
long and thorny way leading to this moment.
From: A. Papazian
VOTE 2013 | 25.01.13 | 15:51
By GAYANE ABRAHAMYAN
ArmeniaNow reporter
Political analysts describe the first week of campaigning in Armenia's
presidential election as "quiet and uninteresting," which is unlikely
to break the indifference and distrust towards the electoral processes
rooted in the public.
Enlarge Photo
Shushan Khatlamajyan
Enlarge Photo
Alexander Iskandaryan
Enlarge Photo
Edgar Vardanyan
The situation created in Armenia when the second most powerful
political force (Prosperous Armenia Party) in the country quits the
race before its official start and the largest opposition force does
not field a candidate for the most important election (based on its
leader's age claim) is unclear not only to broad sections of the
Armenian public, but also to international observers and ambassadors.
The start of the campaign was marked by a controversial note made by
British Ambassador Catherine Leach on her personal blog. She described
it as "disappointing" that "three of the key non-government parties in
parliament are neither putting up a candidate of their own nor backing
any other." Her Majesty's ambassador meant the Prosperous Armenia
Party, the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (Dashnaktsutyun) and
the Armenian National Congress, which made such decisions in December.
The election-related concerns voiced by the ambassador evoked a
critical reaction of the Armenian authorities some of whom went as far
as qualifying it as interference in Armenia's domestic affairs by a
representative of a foreign state. But in reality the ambassador did
not raise any issue that would not be of concern to any local resident.
Meanwhile, the main question concerning the ongoing election campaign
is whether it is a true competition of ideas and platforms or a
'staged' event, an event during which the main discussion is going
around not those taking part in it, but those not participating.
Political analysts believe that the current president will have
no problem getting reelected and that his main challenge will be
motivating people to go to the polls, but they do not agree with the
qualifications that the current election is "noncompetitive".
"What does a noncompetitive election mean? There is a competition
going on, simply it is not against Serzh Sargsyan, but among the other
candidates, for example, [Heritage party leader] Raffi Hovannisian,
[Liberty party leader] Hrant Bagratyan, [National Self-Determination
Union chairman] Paruyr Hayrikyan. They are competing for the voter,"
says director of the Yerevan-based Caucasus Institute Alexander
Iskandaryan.
According to Iskandaryan, politicians are taking part in the
presidential election not only to become presidents, but for other
purposes as well.
"Their participation addresses other issues - ensure their political
presence, make it more prominent, mobilize their electorate for further
campaigns, or to simply become known by public," says Iskandaryan,
assuring that it's normal and is a common practice in many countries.
Expert Shushan Khatlamajyan, project coordinator at Civil Society and
Regional Institute, believes that "the campaign is fully adequate to
the political and social situation in the country and the opposition's
backing down half-way was to be expected and a natural thing to
happen".
"It's very easy to be oppositional, when the main requirement is
speaking, even if with facts, but as soon as it comes to actions,
they realize they can't offer anything new, the re-branding of former
authorities [the reference is to first president Levon Ter-Petrosyan
now leading oppositional Armenian National Congress) was unsuccessful
and soon lost its influence," she told ArmeniaNow.
Khatlamajyan believes that the lack of competition is the result
of not only the monopolization of the political field, but also the
opposition's strategic mistakes.
Last week President Sargsyan said in an interview to RFE/RL that
"it is not the authorities' job to cultivate and nurture opponents. I
believe that the authorities' duty is to create a competitive field,
competitive atmosphere." And he believes it has been "accomplished".
Meanwhile political analyst Edgar Vardanyan from the Armenian Center
for National and International Studies (ACNIS) says "it is simply
unacceptable to speak about a competitive field when we are dealing
with clan agreements and showdowns".
Nonetheless, Vardanyan is convinced that regardless of everything "the
participation of the oppositional forces in the elections wouldn't
have made a difference given the current situation".
"I disagree with the speculations and opinions that their refusal to
participate has made the elections uncompetitive. Considering the
public attitude of late towards these political forces, I can say
that even in theory their participation couldn't have stirred strong
civil movement," says Vadanyan.
As an important characteristic of this campaign, the analyst points
out Sargsyan's new strategy: rather than using black PR and criticism
against his opponents, the president is using pro-establishment
media to picture them as "not serious, uninformed, or, as people say,
simpletons", while there are candidates among them who have taken a
long and thorny way leading to this moment.
From: A. Papazian