| ELECTION CAMPAIGN KICKS OFF IN ARMENIA 
ALEXANDER ISKANDARYAN,
Director of Caucasus Media Institute, Yerevan, Armenia In the course of the presidential election campaign, which has been officially launched in Armenia, the major struggle will unfold between two candidates. Those are Serzh Sargsyan, Prime Minister and leader of the Republican Party, and Levon Ter-Petrossian, the first President of Armenia (1991-1998).
Why are these two candidates considered to be frontrunners? It is not popular support that makes their chances high. The point is that the other seven candidates do not intend to win the election. They have other reasons for running in the election. Some would like to voice their political stand, some intend to promote their parties, etc. After all, only two candidates are going to take up the presidential post.
Assessing their chances is both difficult and easy. It is easy because, according to the public opinion polls, if the election was held on Sunday, January 27, Serzh Sargsyan would win it. But as the election will take place in February, the situation can change. The election campaign has just started and the election strategies of the candidates are evolving, with their election manifestos being on the mass media’s radar screen in all Armenia.
Previously Levon Ter-Petrossian carried out his campaign through rallies that took place only in Yerevan, embracing about one third of the Armenian population, but now he mounts the campaigning in the mass media. This can change the situation.
That’s why at the present time I would not predict the election returns. Various scenarios can occur. Now Sargsyan has better chances. Of course, Ter-Petrossian might use some of his trump cards, as well as Sargsyan might slip up.
Ter-Petrossian’s advantage is that he is a public politician. Sargsyan is not a public politician, he is a manager and an organizer. It comes natural that they have different electoral bases and different ways to conduct the electoral campaign. Sargsyan has a powerful tool represented by the Republican Party. I remind you that in the spring parliamentary election the Republican Party took three times as many votes as the presidential party “Prospering Armenia”. As a result, the Prime Minister had the parliamentary majority and, as the President became a “lame duck”, the Prime Minister also took control of the state machinery. The Republican Party has a developed network of regional offices. Of course, the party is not as all-embracing as the Russia’s “United Russia”, but it brings together bureaucrats and affiliated business, which other parties fail to do.
The parties supporting Ter-Petrossian as well as their regional networks are developed worse. But they have the leader, an impressive person. Ter-Petrossian is the first President. He took part in the revolutionary movement in Nagorno-Karabakh in the late 1980s. For ten years he, as a wise person, stayed out of politics. All in all, a fine image is taking shape.
Armenia’s electorate can be divided into three groups. The first one is the voters supporting stability. In the main, those include bureaucrats and businessmen who are interested in preserving the existing system, they come out for the evolution. But this group is too small.
The second group is the protest voters who are poor and in despair (mainly the intelligentsia). Sometimes their views differ. Those opposing the authorities for material reasons can change their position. The voters who do not back the authorities on principle will vote against them. It is another thing that there are too few of such voters to bring their candidate to power.
The third group is the smallest. It consists of apathetic and apolitical voters. Sargsyan seeks to enlist their support saying that if he comes to power, he and his team will continue to follow his policy but more zealously. He said that they will build roads, raise pensions, improve social policy, etc. Implicitly bribing these voters by building a road in a village and giving them recommendations for whom to vote, is an efficient way to make these people participate in the elections.
Ter-Petrossian’s task is to turn some apathetic voters into protest ones who would vote against the authorities. This is in the interest of Ter-Petrossian who conducts his campaign against Sargsyan. But it is extremely difficult to do within only a month. To that end, Ter-Petrossian will address social problems.
In terms of the programs of the two candidates, there are no serious divergences between them. In principle, both programs are not concrete, they read in general that the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh must be solved, the social situation must be improved, etc.
As for the turnout, it is not regarded as a problem. I do not think that it will be high. The Armenian political system is developing and nobody will get as many as 99 percent of the vote. I do not think that the turnout will be very low either. In my opinion it will be a little higher that during the parliamentary elections (about 60 percent).
As regards the prospects of Armenia’s foreign policy after the elections, I do not expect that it will change dramatically. This policy is determined by objective circumstances. Those are the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, bad relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey as well as the geographical configuration in which Armenia cooperates with Russia via Georgia, it can cooperate with Europe only via Turkey and Armenia is in good terms with two countries (Iran and Georgia) out of four neighboring ones. One must bear in mind that in the military and political sphere Armenia is closely related to Russia and economically – to Europe (70 percent of the trade balance). At the same time Russia is the largest investor. Those facts do not allow Armenia to change its foreign policy dramatically.
The same is true of the attitude towards the foreign and, in particular, Russian business. The Armenian government and elites welcome all investments and the foreign capital. The French, Italian, American and Kazakh money come to Armenia, but the the Kazakh capital is prevailing. It is understood in Armenia that the foreign investment is important, so, for political reasons the bilateral relations will not be reconsidered. In this respect Armenia differs from Georgia.
I can give a specific example. The Russian RusAl company reconstructed the modern Kanaker aluminum plant virtually from scratch. The plant had been in awful condition before the Russian money started to be invested in it. The German Achenbańh firm was in charge of the plant modernization. Over 90 percent of its products are exported to Europe. In a sense, the Russian money becomes more “European”. As a result Armenia acquires new jobs and additional economic ties. It comes natural that nobody is going to forgo that as well as reconsider the relations with the business.
January 28, 2008
|
