What would be interesting to see is if Hovhanissian would back Vazgen Manukyan — that would quite interesting development to observe.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=7301826795

Levon Ter-Petrosyanic zzvoghner:
http://www.facebook.com/s.php?k=100000004&id=7361831931&gr=2

I guess Serzh learned from the best. ;-)

I think these ellections are also a question of Identity!

When I was young and we had LTP, I was proud of our president because he projected an image of a clever and intellectual leader on international arena, thus distinguishing Armenia from the rogue governments of Azerbaijan and Georgia. As I said, I was young and naive back then. Yet in these presidential elections there is also a certain element of choosing your Image, Face and Identity that you wish to project to the international community and be proud of.

In my case, I would not wish to project my Armenianness through any chosen figure embodied in the person of the president, but rather through a reference to and a mental association with a uniquely democratic system of power. Have you ever heard how proud the Swiss are of being Swiss??? and yet Swizerland is composed of 3 dominant nationalities, plus various ethnolinguistic groups. And the most fascinating thing is that after they’ve declaired their pride for their country, when you ask them who is their president, they pause and stumble since in most cases Swiss don’t even know who their current president is (because presidents are not embodiments of political power and change every 6 months)…
In effect, what we see in case of Swizerland is not an allegiance and pride that is inherently Monarchical (ie centered around the cult of a given persona) and not Nationalistinc (ie in reference to an exclusive etholinguistic group) but Participatory (ie the citizen takes pride, association and self-identification in the uniqueness of the political *system* of his country — he takes pride in the unique democratic achievements and liberties, which are also her/his achievements). I hope that one fine day I would be able to be proud of my Armenianness precisely in those terms.

“Aravot” analyzes opposition leader Levon Ter-Petrosian’s latest speech, saying it contained both “strong and weak” points. “In his speech Levon Ter-Petrosian correctly pointed out that the parliament has become a ‘spineless and wretched puppet’ but did not say that the National Assembly has been like that since 1995,” editorializes the paper. “It is that parliament [elected in 1995] which was first penetrated by semi-criminal elements. It is there that button-pressing individuals devoid of intellect first constituted an overwhelming majority.” The paper insists that both the current and former Armenian authorities have ignored voters’ opinion. “Ter-Petrosian has a lot of reason to repent on this issue,” it concludes.

[...]

“Azg” questions Ter-Petrosian’s assurances that his key aim is not to win back power but to turn Armenia into a democratic state. The paper is especially suspicious of his claims that he is not intent on bringing his entourage to power along with him. “If you are not saying who you are bringing to power and are saying instead that your cronies will hold no posts and that you will oust these [authorities], isn’t this nothing but adventurism and a bid to condemn the state and the people to anarchy and chaos? And if Ter-Petrosian is lying and wants to come to power with his supporters, it would be more honest to make that clear.”

Opposition leader Vazgen Manukian on Tuesday again ruled out the possibility of supporting former President Levon Ter-Petrosian in the forthcoming presidential election, saying that his longtime rival is not fundamentally different from Armenia’s current leaders.

“These authorities must go and that is inevitable,” he said. “But who should replace them? I fear that we would get more of the same [with Ter-Petrosian’s return to power.]”

Manukian, who himself plans to for run for president, indicated that he will not endorse Ter-Petrosian even if the February 19 election goes into a second round pitting the ex-president against Prime Minister Serzh Sarkisian. He expressed his readiness to back other opposition hopefuls and even the presidential candidate of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, a junior partner in the governing coalition.

“They are putting the people in a very difficult situation because the majority of the people do not accept either party,” Manukian told a news conference. “There are people who consider Levon Ter-Petrosian the lesser evil but there are also many, many people who consider Serzh Sarkisian the lesser evil. And I don’t exclude that if Levon Ter-Petrosian and Serzh Sarkisian go into the second round Serzh Sarkisian will emerge as a legitimate president.”

“I think [Ter-Petrosian] should not have nominated his candidacy in the first place,” he said.

Basically, I think a lot now depends on Raffi Hovannisian. That is, if his candidacy is not accepted will he support Ter Petrosian, another opposition candidate such as Artur Baghdasarian or Vazgen Manukian, or urge a boycott.

Certainly, although a serious campaign might win support for Ter Petrosian, without the support of Hovannisian, Baghdasarian or Manukian, he stands no chance. The arguments about whether Ter Petrosian represents an alternative to the system he was partly responsible for creating are also valid.

One more question about the relations between Heritage and Serzh Sargsyan. Why does the prime minister respond to the questions of your faction in an apparently tense way during the questions-and-answers session of the government?

We have the right and obligation to demand from the government to be responsible for their words. One cannot deliver speeches and raise issues only for campaigning purposes. We have been just registering that the government is not being responsible for its words. We would be very glad if Serzh Sargsyan stopped talking with us in an ironic manner. It should be mentioned that he does it not only to Heritage. He has been doing it in a very subtle way. However, I think that it is not permissible to relate to the National Assembly in such a style and vocabulary.

I think after this televised comment by SS the stereotypical images of the potential candidates are beginning to solidify: LTP is the “nerdy voice of reason”, and SS is the “populist folkish dude appealing to the rabiz underclass lumpenproletariat”.

After reading LTP’s speeches, I need to say that I’m not too enthusiastic about where LTP is heading with his critique of referenda and plebiscites, combined with play of words of “concessions” and “compromise”, so it is definitely early to judge… but Serjio is really taking the biscuit. I guess he has no experience of dealing with mass media other than with a muscle.

I hope LTP doesn’t descend to SS’s level… ultimately it’s a question of what kind of substance and of what quality will be commonplace on Armenian political stage.

http://www.echannel.am/?topic_id=978