Aravot, Armenia
Jan 23 2018
There is no intrigue: An election without choice
by Ruben Mehrabyan
[Armenian News note: the below is translated from the Russian edition of Aravot]
It has become known to the public in Armenia, who the [ruling] Republican Party [of Armenia RPA] that has an overwhelming majority in the National Assembly [Parliament] is going to nominate to the post of forth Armenian president [Armenian ambassador to the UK, Armen Sargsyan].
It is known that Armenian citizens will no longer elect president by direct vote as provided by the new constitution and this right is to go to parliament, which means that it is the forces that the public have voted for that will determine the candidacies for the top post in Armenia.
Everything is normal in terms of formalities, so to say, "according to documents" and the process as such could have been regarded as normal except for some decisive aspects and the personality that is already known to the public is of no importance here.
How was presidential candidate selected?
The RPA has an overwhelming majority, so it decides, who is to become president. However, it is essential here how they decided that it was this candidate, who was to be given preference. Who is familiar with the discussions, disputes, and the official "short list" of the candidates, of whom preference was given to precisely this person? In addition, it was announced after the closed meeting that his name would soon become known and the chairman of the RPA would soon announce it. Citizens know nothing else and it follows according to the rules of the genre that have taken shape that everything should have proceeded precisely in this manner.
At the same time, it is known that the RPA is not a party, where real discussions are possible and must take place. Of course, it is impossible not to take into account opinions and sentiments as well as the interests of the system and the results of the years-long selection of the personnel, but this is not about direct discussions in classical, parliamentary, modern, and European sense.
'Party disease' in Armenia
The RPA is no exception in this regard. This is a most important symptom of the "party disease" in Armenia that has encompassed all parties almost without exception. They have "leaders", "chiefs", "chief-jans [Armenian way of expressing respect for people]", "the father of our party", and so forth depending on taste and level. However, no matter what the constitution says and what stamp a document may bear, there can be no parliamentarianism in Armenia without eradicating these feudal and provincial features.
There are no longer any parties in Armenia that would stand against democracy. Even the Communist Party that advocates the idea of reverting to the Soviet Union is not against it. However, how many of the several dozens of parties in Armenia are not small Saudi Arabia or small North Korea? Fingers of one hand are probably sufficient to count them.
'No intrigue'
On the other hand, was it worth having great expectations from the process and the result of the election of the fourth president? Given all that has happened in Armenia since the elections in 1995-1996 and taking into account the "Eurasian paradise" and the "company" Armenia has found itself in, this could hardly be expected. Should the RPA carry out a change of government with its own hands for those waiting? Or should it have given preference to someone in the opposition or someone, who would shatter the positions of today's overwhelming majority? Of course, no. On the contrary! The decision was made within the logic of the system, which was an attempt to strengthen positions, add external lustre to the system, not to fall in the eyes of Western partners, and leave room for talk, particularly after the Armenia-EU agreement was signed.
Of course, there is no intrigue in all this and there could have been no intrigue. The personality of the candidate – his name – could have been the only intrigue, because the list that circulated as a "probable" list nevertheless continued to be intriguing at the personal level to a certain extent. In addition, the candidate's promise that he was going to "think" [about to agree to the proposal or not] also made the process more intriguing. However, what is there to think about ultimately? And the government are hardly able to propose a better candidate from their "substitutes' bench". What can they do? Can they nominate, say, [Constitutional Court Chairman] Gagik Harutyunyan or [Foreign Minister] Edvard Nalbandyan? There was a moment, when it seemed intriguing that, as [Armenian President] Serzh Sargsyan said, a person, who has not been involved in politics, should be the candidate… [ellipsis as published] However, when the name of the candidate became known soon after, a question was raised: What was he involved in if not politics, when he held the political post of prime minister? Moreover, representing Armenia is the UK as the ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary, the candidate also represents political decisions of Yerevan, politics, and interests. Is this anything other than politics?
It is another issue, when they discuss whether he is a member of the party [RPA] or not. Yes, the candidate was not a party member and is not a party member. However, it is no longer interesting whether he has a membership document or not, as he is running [in the election] as the candidate of the ruling party. In addition, as Armenia is switching to the parliamentary system of governance, it must be said that politics can no longer be non-partisan, of course, if it is about classical and real parliamentarianism, not a mutation. And this remark is not at all abstract. The USSR and Mao's China were also a kind of parliamentary countries run by one party that had its "fathers". But no, Armenia is not China as well as it is not Russia no matter how much they may speak or dream about "fathers". So let us put them aside.
Yes, there is no intrigue and there is going to be no intrigue either and Armenia will have its fourth president one way or another. The intrigue is in another place. And this is a question of national security and a challenge to political forces and the state rather than an intrigue: The lack of parties ready to function and congruent with the objectives of political parties in the parliamentary system.
