COLORED REVOLUTIONS AND THE POLITICAL TURMOIL IN ARMENIA
Rovshan Ibrahimov

Journal of Turkish Weekly
March 14 2008
Turkey

As a result of presidential elections in Armenia, the third president
of this country has become Prime Minister Serg Sarkisian. Sarkisian
was the successor to the old authorities and Kocharian in particular.

Both are from Karabakh, in this case coming to power Sarkisian was
also guarantee the continuation of the course of governance and the
interests of the Karabakh clan. Superfluous proof of this thesis is
in the position of the main opponent of Sarkisian in the presidential
race Ter-Petrossian, who explained their accusations that the current
authority with their actions only worsens the plight of the country
and not in its policies in the name of Armenia, but for the sake of
their own interests.

The results of elections in Armenia can be analyzed from two
perspectives: on the one hand through comparison with similar election
conducted in the countries, the post-Soviet space, on the other,
identifying the distinctive features of the electoral process in
Armenia.

Sarkisian, as a member of the current government, and thus have the
opportunity to use the extensive public resource, in the end, was
elected the new President of Armenia. The transition of power to the
receiver, widely used in the post-Soviet space, including in Russia,
was also implemented in Armenia. In principle, this fact is rather
typical, than specific.

The transition from one authority to another in the post-Soviet space
interrupted only in two cases: when, immediately after independence,
in some states, using the general confusion have came reactionary
forces. An example of this Gamsakhurdiya serves regimes in Georgia;
Elchibey in Azerbaijan may be shown. However, referring to the lack of
experience in the state ruling and existed domestic political chaos,
the return to power previous leaders of these republics, during the
Soviet period with enormous experience of government.

Other regimes that came after collapsing of the Soviet Union under
the force-major circumstances might also be included governments of
Ter-Petrosian in Armenia and Yeltsin in Russia. But these two leaders
for many reasons have been forced to resign, never having completed
their legal deadline of government, also appointing a successor to
their seats of power.

Another case is the so-called "velvet revolutions" after which new
regimes have come to power in such countries as Georgia, Ukraine
and Kyrgyzstan. But whether changing of leader in Kyrgyzstan occurred
early in the wake of developments in Georgia and Ukraine, than with the
support of the "outside", in the last two cases, countries had clearly
felt the support of Western countries, mainly the United States.

However, even in these cases, "non-standard" abandonment chain
management countries with one team have its loopholes. So the new
leaders of all three countries have experience of government in
previous regimes, holding any positions in the government. In other
words, the "new" regimes also failed to come to power from the outside,
but were part of the nomenclature of previous commands.

Furthermore, the new government time to take root in power and already
own an interest in turn of the conversation of their regimes: so
Saakashvili was re-elected for a second term, and President Yushchenko
appointed to the post of Prime Minister Timoshenko, his fellow at
the recent "Orange Revolution".

In short, some countries of the former Soviet Union have experience
to implement practice of the transfer of power to a successor. It
will be applied in the future again especially to the countries of
Central Asia, where some leaders remain in power from Soviet times.

Referring specifically Armenia, in my earlier comment on Turkishweekly
"Presidential Elections in Armenia and Its Uniqueness" dated February
8, 2008, I have noted that non-standard provisions in the country after
the nomination of Ter-Petrossian his candidacy for the presidency
of this country. This step completely changed the situation in the
country and the electoral process has withdrawn from the formal
transition of power to a successor to the intransigent confrontation
between the government and opposition supporters of Ter-Petrossian.

Ter-Petrosian has experience in governance and a politician who could
consolidate the opposition forces. That is what happened in Armenia,
where tens of thousands of supporters of Ter-Petrosian immediately
took to the streets in support of their candidate. Situation has
changed to the fact that the authorities had to resort to force to
disperse the demonstrators, resulting in accordance to the official
figures with 8 killed people. The authorities have imposed censorship
on the information, even limiting access to the Internet. The situation
remains unstable.

As the situation Sarkisian be able to retain power and become the
next President of Armenia. This is due primarily to the fact that
Ter-Petrosian has not received the support of Western countries,
and the demonstrations did not escalate into another "a color
revolution". Incidentally Ter-Petrosian has already been publicly
accuse the West that they did not support the democratic forces in
Armenia, thereby helped advance the liberal values in the country.

Now in Armenia is relatively silent. Perhaps soon Sarkisian will
receive from the powers of the President Kocharian, but not stable
governance, which was in the time of Kocharian. The current government
should realize that in today’s Armenia there is a strong opposition
and a strong leader who will not fall behind. So, Sarkisian regime
will therefore be respected to the reality.