PROTESTS SOAR IN ARMENIA AS ELECTION OUTCOME IS CONTESTED
by Natalia Leshchenko
Global Insight
February 27, 2008
Eight days after the presidential election in Armenia, the emotions are
swelling rather subsiding, a cause for concern for the president-elect,
Serzh Sargsyan. His election opponent, Armenia’s first president Lev
Ter-Petrossian, who gathered 21.5% of the 19 February presidential
vote against Sargsyan’s 53%, has not only been able to organise mass
protests contesting the election result, but has also managed to build
up the opposition momentum and see the number of his supporters soar
on Tuesday (26 February) and Wednesday (27 February). They occupy the
Liberty Square in the capital Yerevan, maintaining night vigils. Tens
of thousands of people are universally reported to be protesting in the
square. The authorities attempted to retaliate in kind by delivering
people from the regions to an alternative rally, only to lose a large
share of participants to Ter-Petrossian. Sargsyan has also extended an
olive branch to Ter-Petrossian and other election candidates inviting
them to a new government, but Ter-Petrossian snapped that this was
too little, too late. In an attempted "carrot and stick" policy,
the authorities are simultaneously warning that their patience
is running out and that they may use force to restore "order"
in the capital. Police have already arrested some Ter-Petrossian
supporters, accusing them of plotting seizure of the national TV and
radio stations.
Significance:International observers from the Organisation for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) watchdog have evaluated the
presidential poll as "mostly" democratic, and are calling for restraint
on both sides. At the heart of the matter is the competition between
the charismatic and populist Ter-Petrossian, who is able to ignite and
harness the masses, and bureaucratic Serzh Sargsyan who can control
the business and administrative elites but has problems relating
to the people directly. Foreign interests play a secondary role in
the contest as Russia, Armenia’s principal investor, has refrained
from playing an active role in the conflict, while the West is also
staying away from pronounced involvement in order not to undermine
Ter-Petrossian by association with their allies but domestically
perceived enemies of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Turkey. As the tide of
popular pressure seems to be growing towards Ter-Petrossian, Armenian
authorities face the dilemma of crushing dissent and maintaining power,
or appearing democratic and seeing their power seriously challenged
if not seized from them.
Paradoxically, less public support for Ter-Petrossian could produce the
most desired outcome from the point of view of Armenia’s democracy, as
it would induce the government and the opposition into power-sharing
agreements. A winner-takes-it-all outcome can hardly bring any
sustainable stability to this small but strategically important
country.